FreedomWorks - Lower Taxes, Less Government, More Freedomhttp://www.freedomworks.org/feed
enCommon Core Testing Sparks Walkoutshttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/common-core-testing-sparks-walkouts
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/fleeingschool.jpg?itok=2dAaash7"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/fleeingschool.jpg?itok=2dAaash7" width="480" height="319" alt="Students around the country are fleeing standardized testing." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>In New Mexico, hundreds of high school students are <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/02/frustrated-students-walk-out-over-new-tests-contested-in-us/">walking out</a> of class in protest of the new Common Core-aligned tests just implemented in the state. This is part of larger movement nationwide by parents and students to protest the standards, while without waiting for state legislatures to act.</p>
<p>The students are concerned that the increased focus on testing is detracting from more meaningful education goals - a concern that is very much justified.</p>
<p>Education is far too complex a thing to be captured by a single number, but a recent obsession with “international competitiveness” by policy makers in Washington, DC has led to the Department of Education demanding more and more testing in exchange for flexibility waivers for No Child Left Behind and funding from Race to the Top.</p>
<p>The problem with this is that standardized tests really only measure one thing - how good you are at taking standardized tests. In the real world, people compete by being creative, original, diligent, entrepreneurial, and professional, not by rote memorization. This is why countries whose children perform well on standardized tests frequently have <a href="http://zhaolearning.com/2012/06/06/test-scores-vs-entrepreneurship-pisa-timss-and-confidence/">little to show</a> in terms of economic and scientific innovation - areas in which the United States traditionally shines.</p>
<p>The more test scores are emphasized, the more classroom time must be devoted to test preparation, and like every other decision, this carries an opportunity cost. Time spent “teaching to the test” is time that cannot be spent on more productive activities, for example, encouraging critical thinking skills and allowing students to explore their own curiosity.</p>
<p>It’s easy to feel helpless in the face of an increasingly inflexible education bureaucracy that values conformity over genuine learning, but the kinds of walk-outs we are seeing in New Mexico are an extremely powerful way to send a message that Common Core standards are not acceptable. If more students were willing to take the plunge and opt out of these tests, state legislatures would have little choice but to act. The symbol of thousands of children outright refusing the tests mandated by government is one that would be impossible to ignore. All it takes to create political change is for brave people to stand up and fight.</p>
<p>To find out more about how you can fight back against Common Core in your state, download Glenn Beck’s action plan “We Will Not Conform.”</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Get the plan now!</div></div></div>Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:42:03 +0000logan.albright61191 at http://www.freedomworks.orgFCC’s Net Neutrality: Fixing a Nonexistent Problemhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/fcc%E2%80%99s-net-neutrality-fixing-nonexistent-problem
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/CPAC FCC.jpg?itok=bF0NN7wy"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/CPAC FCC.jpg?itok=bF0NN7wy" width="480" height="428" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Last Thursday the Federal Communications Commission <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/net-neutrality-wrapup-what-does-fccs-decision-mean">voted 3-2 to regulate broadband internet as a public utility</a>. This decision to regulate the internet was made mostly through secret meetings without public comment and less than a decade after the FCC declined to regulate the internet because there was no necessity. Even worse, because the 300-plus page new rule has not been made public yet, we still do not know exactly what is in the rule. Since the Federal Trade Commission already has the authority to protect consumers from anticompetitive business practices, the FCC’s new rules are another example of government trying to fix a problem that is nonexistent. The new rules may in fact harm consumers both by limiting competition, and by preventing the FTC from filing charges against internet providers once they are determined to be common carriers.</p>
<p>On Saturday, CPAC had a great panel which covered the new FCC ruling and why it was unnecessary and how these expansive new rule makings could be limited. The panel consisted of Commissioner Ajit Pai, an outspoken commissioner of the FCC, Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen, of the Federal Trade Commission, Commissioner Scott Kieff, of the International Trade Commission, and Representative Bob Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Committee on the Judiciary.</p>
<p>According to Commissioner Pai, the internet is the “greatest success story in human history” and has led to countless innovations, investments and connections while promoting free speech and freedom of the individual. This innovative tool will now be regulated similarly to the way gas, oil and telephones are regulated. These regulations most likely will lead to stifled innovation and limited competition and consumer choices. Frankly, the FCC’s decision to regulate the internet as a public utility is a fix begging for a problem. Even worse, the new rules prevent the FTC from protecting consumers from anticompetitive behavior in the industry.</p>
<p>The FTC’s mission is to protect consumers from anticompetitive or unfair business practices “without unduly burdening legitimate business activity.” They have done this by going after Bell Systems in the 1970s to bring more choices to consumers in the telephone industry, and have recently <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2015/01/prepaid-mobile-provider-tracfone-pay-40-million-settle-ftc">reached a settlement with TracFone</a> that will provide consumers a $40 million refund. They <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/28/technology/28net.html?_r=1&amp;">came out strongly against regulating the internet</a> as a public utility the last time the FCC considered such action in 2007 because there was no evidence of market failure or consumer harm. The FTC also believed that they had the tools to fix anticompetitive practices on the internet on a more reasonable case-by-case basis. This power is now in doubt since the FTC does not have power over common carriers and the FCC’s new rules redefine the internet as a common carrier.</p>
<p>I learned many things at CPAC, one of the most important is that the FCC is trying to fix a problem that does not presently exist by regulating the internet as a public utility. Not only will this thwart innovation and investment in the internet, it may actually eliminate FTC oversight. The internet has been a great success in part because it has been kept relatively unburdened from government regulation; the FCC’s new rules change everything.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Pro-Net Neutrality Groups Protest FCC Overreach</div></div></div>Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:00:21 +0000mgreibrok61189 at http://www.freedomworks.orgKey Vote YES on Eliminating Federal Subsidies for Amtrakhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/key-vote-yes-eliminating-federal-subsidies-amtrak
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>As one of our over 6.9 million FreedomWorks members nationwide, I urge you to contact your representative and urge him or her to vote YES on the McClintock amendment to H.R. 749. This amendment would fully eliminate federal subsidies for Amtrak.</p>
<p>The federally subsidized Amtrak passenger rail company has been a taxpayer boondoggle for decades. An inefficient and at times unreliable service, even billions of dollars in federal subsidies haven’t stopped Amtrak from continuing to lose tens of millions of dollars each year.</p>
<p>Republicans have claimed that they desire to end Amtrak funding, or at least to greatly reform it, but H.R. 749 fails to do either. Indeed, for the first several years, the spending levels are higher.</p>
<p>Instead of continuing to use taxpayer dollars to allow Amtrak to limp along with all of its operational problems, Congress should simply cut its losses and leave the markets to decide how or if passenger rail should operate. Private competition for rail routes is far more likely to result in better and more efficient service in those areas where there is demand for passenger rail.</p>
<p>Thus, I hope that you’ll tell your representative to vote YES on the McClintock Amendment to H.R. 749, to defund Amtrak subsidies. We will count his or her vote as a KEY VOTE in FreedomWorks’ Economic Freedom Scorecard for 2015. The Scorecard is used to determine eligibility for the FreedomFighter Award, which recognizes members of Congress with voting records that support economic freedom.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Matt Kibbe
President and CEO,
FreedomWorks</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-files field-type-file field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Files:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="///d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/KVN%202015-03-03%20-%20McClintock%20Amdt.%20%28Eliminate%20Amtrak%20Subsidies%29.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=422211">KVN 2015-03-03 - McClintock Amdt. (Eliminate Amtrak Subsidies).pdf</a></span></div></div></div>Tue, 03 Mar 2015 18:51:25 +0000mkibbe61184 at http://www.freedomworks.orgCPAC Panel on the Export-Import Bankhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/cpac-panel-export-import-bank
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/exim_1.jpg?itok=p4PxGwe6"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/exim_1.jpg?itok=p4PxGwe6" width="225" height="225" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Last weekend, the 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) met in Washington, DC to address the most important issues in America. Everybody who attended was well aware that free markets in America have been under assault by the federal government’s crony relationships with private corporations.</p>
<p>One institution that epitomizes this crony relationship is the Export-Import bank. Tim Carney of the Washington Examiner was on a panel at CPAC that specifically addressed this issue. He brought up the point that cronyism has falsely distorted the meaning of capitalism, from one of free-market competition to one of protecting the interests of rich corporations.</p>
<p>But, as Carney pointed out, there is a great difference between free-market capitalism and crony programs that force taxpayers to hand out corporate welfare. In fact, nothing about the Export-Import bank contains a single atom of free-market DNA.</p>
<p>For example, the bank was <a href="http://www.exim.gov/about/whoweare/history.cfm">established by an executive order</a> under President Franklin Roosevelt. Since then, its function has been to <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/09/29/export-import-bank-elizabeth-warren-fdr-corporations-column/16385923/">protect large corporations</a> from the burdens of competition, by providing low-interest loans funded by taxpayers to people and institutions who will support American exports.</p>
<p>To illustrate the extent to which the bank exclusively serves the interests of politically connected corporations, it has been dubbed <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/export-import-banks-damage-to-american-firms/2012/03/15/gIQAFDSNHS_story.html">“Boeing’s Bank” </a>because it provides the multi-national company with tons of assistance. In fact, of all the loan guarantees that the bank made in 2012, <a href="https://www.heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-export-import-bank">80 percent went straight to Boeing</a>. <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/public-data-suggest-ex-im-bank-not-everyone">Three of the top five</a> beneficiaries from the bank in 2013 included Boeing, General Electric, and Caterpillar. Obviously the Export-Import bank is a lucrative deal for large corporations.</p>
<p>Ironically, the bank’s largest supporters are traditional progressives who tend to speak out against these unfair policies that disproportionately favor the rich. For instance, <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/hillary-shills-ex-im-bank">Hillary Clinton</a>,<a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/ex-im-bank-do-you-side-hillary-warren-and-reid"> Elizabeth Warren</a>, and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/06/26/candidate-obama-echoing-tea-party-called-ex-im-bank-little-more-than-a-fund-for-corporate-welfare/">Barack Obama are all fighting to keep the bank alive</a>. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/06/26/candidate-obama-echoing-tea-party-called-ex-im-bank-little-more-than-a-fund-for-corporate-welfare/">In a classic political flip-flop</a>, when President Obama was still a candidate in 2008, he referred to the bank as nothing more than a fund for corporate welfare.</p>
<p>Fortunately, the Export-Import bank’s charter expires this June. If congress refuses to vote on reauthorizing its charter, then the 80 year-old corporate welfare engine will finally be eliminated. It is important that you stand up for free markets and tell your representative to get rid of this crony institution.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Learn More About Why The Export-Import Bank Needs to End</div></div></div>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 22:41:53 +0000Nate Russell61182 at http://www.freedomworks.orgJudges to Congress: Let Us Issue The Punishments, Not Youhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/judges-congress-let-us-issue-punishments-not-you
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/handcuff.jpg?itok=rjEmfCI3"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/handcuff.jpg?itok=rjEmfCI3" width="425" height="282" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>One of the problems in the criminal justice system is the existence of <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/mandatory-minimums-are-not-conservative-approach-criminal-justice">mandatory minimum sentences</a>. On the federal level, these are laws imposed by Congress that require judges to sentence a guilty offender to a minimum amount of time behind bars. This one-size-fits-all approach is <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/sentencing-reform-let-judges-do-their-jobs">flawed</a> because it does not allow judges to exercise discretion based on the individual circumstances of the case.</p>
<p>In fact, the American Bar Association has long <a href="http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/poladv/letters/crimlaw/2007jul03_minimumsenth_l.authcheckdam.pdf">stated</a> “that mandatory minimum sentencing laws are incompatible with the requirements for just sentencing and we support their repeal by Congress.”</p>
<p>In their own words, here is why these current or retired judges oppose mandatory minimum sentencing laws:</p>
<ul><li><p>U.S. District Judge <a href="http://www.npr.org/2014/12/16/370991710/judge-regrets-harsh-human-toll-of-mandatory-minimum-sentences">John Gleeson</a>: "Mandatory minimums, to some degree, sometimes entirely, take judging out of the mix. That's a bad thing for our system…We talk about numbers, but at the end of the process it's not a number that's getting the sentence. It's a person, a person with a family from a community."</p></li>
<li><p>U.S. District Judge <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/170815/how-mandatory-minimums-forced-me-send-more-1000-nonviolent-drug-offenders-federal-pri">Mark Bennett</a>: “As a federal district judge in Iowa, I have sentenced a staggering number of low-level drug addicts to long prison terms. This is not justice…If lengthy mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug addicts actually worked, one might be able to rationalize them. But there is no evidence that they do. I have seen how they leave hundreds of thousands of young children parentless and thousands of aging, infirm and dying parents childless. They destroy families and mightily fuel the cycle of poverty and addiction.”</p></li>
<li><p>Former Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia <a href="http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/poladv/letters/crimlaw/060303testimony_wald.authcheckdam.pdf">Patricia Wald</a>: “As a matter of policy, mandatory minimum sentences raise a myriad of troubling concerns. To satisfy the basic dictates of fairness, due process and the rule of law, criminal sentencing should be both uniform between similarly situated offenders and proportional to the crime that is the basis of conviction. Mandatory minimum sentences are inconsistent with these twin commands of justice.”</p></li>
<li><p>Former U.S. District Judge <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/federal-judge-regrets-55-year-marijuana-sentence/story?id=28869467">Paul Cassell</a>: "A mandatory minimum is a sentence that says a judge has to impose a particular minimum number of years. It ties the judge’s hands… mandatory minimums can be used to send a message, but at some point the message gets lost.”</p></li>
<li><p>Former U.S. District Judge <a href="http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/312773-drug-crimes-and-mandatory-minimums-judges-take/">Nancy Gertne</a>r: "As a federal judge for the past 17 years, I have had the unpleasant task of sentencing people to lengthy sentences for drug offenses, all the while knowing that the sentences did not promote fairness, much less contribute to public safety…I couldn't take into account the circumstances of the [offender's] life: how he got to that point, the extent to which he was living on the streets, whether or not he had a substantial record.”</p></li>
</ul><p><em>Shouldn't we listen to these judges?</em></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Learn More About Mandatory Minimums</div></div></div>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 21:52:49 +0000JBorowski61181 at http://www.freedomworks.orgCapitol Hill Update, 2 March, 2015http://www.freedomworks.org/content/capitol-hill-update-2-march-2015
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Hill Update Header_20.jpg?itok=tRNGUSKJ"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Hill Update Header_20.jpg?itok=tRNGUSKJ" width="480" height="270" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p><strong>Capitol Hill Update, 2 March, 2015</strong></p>
<p><strong>House &amp; Senate/Schedule:</strong> Both House &amp; Senate are in town all this week. The House will recess next week (March 9-13), while the Senate will stay in D.C. all the way through the Spring recess that starts March 30th.</p>
<p><strong>House &amp; Senate/Spending:</strong> The main event in town once again this week will be funding of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which Congress extended only through the end of this week.</p>
<p><strong>House/Transportation:</strong> The House will consider a bill sponsored by Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA),<a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/749"> H.R. 749</a>, that would reauthorize Amtrak and other railroad funding. While the bill contains some supposed reforms to Amtrak funding, there is no federal role for subsidizing passenger rail at all.</p>
<p><strong>House/Environment:</strong> The House will also consider a bill by Rep. Lamar Smith, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1030">H.R. 1030</a> – the Secret Science Reform Act. This bill would prevent the EPA from taking any regulatory action until all of the scientific research used to support the action is produced publically. Currently the EPA is refusing to release much of the research that supposedly justifies their most economically disruptive regulations ever. A “just-trust-us” approach to justifying regulations cannot be tolerated when the rules in question have economic impacts in the billions of dollars per year.</p>
<p><strong>House &amp; Senate/Taxation:</strong> Last week FreedomWorks endorsed a pair of matching bills that would prevent any level of government from enacting any tax upon broadband internet access. The current prohibition of internet taxation is set to expire at the end of the fiscal year (October 1), whereas these bills would make the ban permanent. The bills are <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/235">H.R. 235</a> (Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act) and <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/431">S. 431</a> (Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act). Check out our letters of support for these bills here: (<a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-representative-support-permanent-internet-tax-freedom-act">HOUSE </a>– <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-senators-support-internet-tax-freedom-forever-act">SENATE</a>).</p>
</div></div></div>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 21:52:09 +0000jwithrow61180 at http://www.freedomworks.orgPro-Net Neutrality Groups Protest FCC Overreachhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/pro-net-neutrality-groups-protest-fcc-overreach
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/NET-NEUTRALITY-600x300_0.jpg?itok=uk7_E5zp"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/NET-NEUTRALITY-600x300_0.jpg?itok=uk7_E5zp" width="480" height="240" alt="Even those who support Net Neutrality think the FCC has gone too far." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The FCC’s recent decision to reclassify the internet as a utility is ruffling some feathers, but not the ones you might expect. The Federal Communications Commission, acting under orders from the president, has been largely successful in representing its decision as a matter of Net Neutrality, of regulating the specific ways in which service providers can manage bandwidth.</p>
<p>While most conservatives oppose Net Neutrality itself, the changes the FCC is now making go much further - so far, in fact, that many supporters of Net Neutrality as a concept are upset at the Commission’s overreach.</p>
<p>For example, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a vocal Net Neutrality supporter, expressed <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/02/fcc-votes-net-neutrality-big-win">concerns</a> over the FCC’s ruling:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>But now we face the really hard part: making sure the FCC doesn’t abuse its authority.</p>
<p>For example, the new rules include a “general conduct rule” that will let the FCC take action against ISP practices that don’t count as blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization. As we said last week and last year, vague rules are a problem. The FCC wants to be, in Chairman Wheeler’s words, “a referee on the field” who can stop any ISP action that it thinks “hurts consumers, competition, or innovation.” The problem with a rule this vague is that neither ISPs nor Internet users can know in advance what kinds of practices will run afoul of the rule. Only companies with significant legal staff and expertise may be able to use the rule effectively. And a vague rule gives the FCC an awful lot of discretion, potentially giving an unfair advantage to parties with insider influence. That means our work is not yet done. We must stay vigilant, and call out FCC overreach.</p>
<p>The actual order is over 300 pages long, and it’s not widely available yet. Details matter.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) is another group that supports Net Neutrality as a concept, but <a href="http://pcb.iconnect007.com/index.php/article/88396/cea-net-neutrality-is-good-but-title-ii-is-wrong/88399/?skin=ein">opposes</a> the FCC’s overreach.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Rushing to regulate the Internet threatens to slow down broadband investment, and reduces competition among providers, which helps keep broadband costs low. Recent legislative proposals from Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) would protect the free and open Internet, while also encouraging the investment and competition necessary to keep the Internet growing and thriving. We hope the FCC and Congress will now work together to take a U-turn and reach a balanced and bipartisan compromise that includes deploying additional spectrum and ensuring Americans have open and robust Internet access.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Even Comcast, which remains in most people’s minds the villain of the piece, has said they <a href="http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/surprise-we-agree-with-the-presidents-principles-on-net-neutrality-reiterating-our-strong-support-for-the-open-internet">support Net Neutrality</a>, but not the <a href="http://corporate.comcast.com/comcast-voices/fcc-votes-on-new-open-internet-rules">broad powers</a> the FCC just granted itself.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We are disappointed the Commission chose this route, which is certain to lead to years of litigation and regulatory uncertainty and may greatly harm investment and innovation, when the use of Section 706 alone would have provided a much more certain and legally sustainable path.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Reasonable people can debate the relative merits of Net Neutrality, but what is clear is that the FCC’s new regulations go too far, and endanger the unlimited potential of a free and unregulated internet.</p>
<p>Of course, FreedomWorks continues to oppose <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/rebutting-president-net-neutrality">any and all</a> efforts for government regulation of the internet, the most remarkable source for innovation and entrepreneurship the world has ever seen.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Learn More About Internet Freedom</div></div></div>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 20:20:16 +0000logan.albright61176 at http://www.freedomworks.orgCPAC Panel on Asset Forfeiturehttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/cpac-panel-asset-forfeiture
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/CPAC Forfeiture.jpg?itok=sNItdi2R"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/CPAC Forfeiture.jpg?itok=sNItdi2R" width="480" height="270" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The practice of asset forfeiture has been a hot topic in Washington D.C. lately, whether it has been Attorney General Eric Holder announcing the federal government will <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/holder-ends-seized-asset-sharing-process-that-split-billions-with-local-state-police/2015/01/16/0e7ca058-99d4-11e4-bcfb-059ec7a93ddc_story.html">no longer take part in the equitable sharing program</a> or the <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/house-hearing-civil-forfeiture">House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations</a> calling into question the entire practice of civil asset forfeiture. Because of the importance and timeliness of the issue, CPAC had a panel consisting of Pat Nolan, Derek Cohen and Darpana Sheth to discuss what is wrong with asset forfeiture and what we the people can do to fix it.</p>
<p>Civil asset forfeiture was passed into law by our First Congress but was used sparingly until prohibition, and more recently, the War on Drugs. One reason for the increasing use of civil asset forfeiture is that in 1984 an Assets Forfeiture Fund was created within the Department of Justice and from that time on seized funds remained within the seizing agency, rather than being put in the government’s general revenue funds. This perverse incentive, where the seizing agency keeps the money, has led to a large increase in the amount of funds seized, <a href="https://www.ij.org/foreword-2">from under $95 million in 1986 to over $1 billion in 2008</a> and subsequent years. The problem with civil asset forfeiture is not that it creates bad actors in law enforcement, it is that the programs have bad laws which created bad incentives for law enforcement.</p>
<p>For instance, I-40 in Tennessee is a <a href="http://www.offthegridnews.com/current-events/tennessee-police-under-investigation-for-taking-cash-from-citizens/">well-known drug corridor</a> where drugs move eastbound towards Nashville and cash flows back west. While law enforcement claims that civil forfeiture is important to stop the drug trade, seizures were made in westbound lanes ten times more often than they were in the eastbound lanes. In other words, police were seizing money returning west after drug transactions instead of seizing the drugs before they reached the city and were distributed to users. Another abuse is that a DEA agent had the job of going through properties to determine which would be ripe for a forfeiture action. They specifically looked for properties that were paid off entirely and were small enough that they could not afford to defend their property in a lawsuit. This led to the <a href="http://reason.com/archives/2012/11/21/drug-dealing-and-legal-stealing">forfeiture of the Motel Caswell</a>, a small family owed hotel where a handful of drug crimes occurred over a 15 year period, and not a local Motel 6, Wal-Mart or Home Depot where similar crimes occurred.</p>
<p>This case is disgusting and shows a larger problem with civil asset forfeiture. The seizing agency does not necessarily go after parties that are harming the public at large, too often the government’s strategy seems to be to go after people with limited funds who will run out of money before they before they can properly defund their property in court. This can lead to innocent people making a settlement out of court to ensure that they are able to keep a portion of their property, rather than lose everything. This is legalized theft!</p>
<p>While there is plenty wrong with civil asset forfeiture, the good news is that you can do something about it. Civil asset forfeiture is a great opportunity to get involved with at the local level because every state, and the federal government, could use reform. There are actually very few supporters of civil asset forfeiture; the problem is that not enough people know about the abuses. The Institute for Justice is currently active in 14 states working on reforms, you can get involved as well.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Support the FAIR Act</div></div></div>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 17:51:11 +0000mgreibrok61179 at http://www.freedomworks.orgFreedomWorks Joins Free-Market Groups to Sit Down With Fed Chair, Janet Yellenhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/freedomworks-joins-free-market-groups-sit-down-fed-chair-janet-yellen
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>FreedomWorks’ Outreach Director Deneen Borelli will join leaders from a number of free-market groups for a sit-down with Janet Yellen, the Chairwoman of the Federal Reserve. The meeting was organized by American Principles in Action, who sent a letter to Yellen requesting the meeting after she met with progressive groups in 2014.
The meeting will take place on Friday, February 27, 2015 at 3pm ET at the Board of Governors HQ at 20th and Constitution Avenue in Washington, DC.</p>
<p>Deneen Borelli commented:</p>
<p>“I'm pleased to have the opportunity to discuss America’s monetary policy with the Chairwoman, and looking forward to a productive conversation about how economic distortions stemming from Federal Reserve policy negatively affect millions of Americans nationwide. If the Federal Reserve is going to meet with progressive groups, they must hear alternative viewpoints from free-market groups as well. Fortunately, we have the facts on our side.”</p>
<p>Among the group representatives attending the meeting:</p>
<p>John Allison, Cato Institute president</p>
<p>Colette Balaam, small business owner</p>
<p>Ellen Barrosse, global business owner</p>
<p>Ralph Benko, economic advisor at APIA</p>
<p>Deneen Borelli, outreach director at FreedomWorks</p>
<p>Matthew DeVries, chairman of Liberty Iowa</p>
<p>Brian Domitrovic, history professor, Sam Houston University</p>
<p>Sean Fieler, president of American Principles in Action (APIA)</p>
<p>Herman Jung</p>
<p>Phil Kerpen, president of American Commitment</p>
<p>Steve Lonegan, director of monetary policy at APIA</p>
<p>Rich Lowrie, senior advisor at Put Growth First</p>
<p>Jim Martin, chairman of the 60 Plus Association</p>
<p>Norbert Michel, Heritage Foundation economist</p>
<p>Marc Miles, economist at Global Economic Solutions</p>
<p>Steve Moore, chief economist at the Heritage Foundation</p>
<p>Sue Ann Penna, president of Citizens for Limited Government</p>
<p>Varditra Reid, working single woman</p>
<p>Peter Sepp, president of the National Taxpayers Union</p>
<p>Judy Shelton, Atlas Network economist</p>
<p>Selina Stinson, retired, homemaker</p>
<p>Jiesi Zhao, director of the center for entrepreneurship at the Young America's Foundation</p>
<p>FreedomWorks aims to educate, build, and mobilize the largest network of activists advocating the principles of smaller government, lower taxes, free markets, personal liberty and the rule of law. For more information, please visit <a href="http://www.FreedomWorks.org">www.FreedomWorks.org</a> or contact Jackie Bodnar at <a href="mailto:JBodnar@FreedomWorks.org">JBodnar@FreedomWorks.org</a>.</p>
</div></div></div>Fri, 27 Feb 2015 18:18:25 +0000jbodnar61177 at http://www.freedomworks.orgHow Congress Forbids Judges From Doing Their Jobhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/how-congress-forbids-judges-doing-their-job
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/judge.jpg?itok=YbU6b4qE"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/judge.jpg?itok=YbU6b4qE" width="448" height="328" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>How should the punishment for convicted offenders be determined?</p>
<p><strong>Option 1:</strong> Judges have discretion and flexibility when it comes to determining punishment. They have the ability to determine the length of prison sentences for convicted offenders based on a number of factors. Judges are allowed to <a href="http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-procedure/sentencing-law-faq.html">weigh</a> the individual circumstances of the case including the convicted defendant’s damage to the victim (if there is one), the degree of planning and participation in the crime. They may also take into <a href="http://www.armstronglegal.com.au/criminal-law/sentencing/how-sentence-is-decided">consideration</a> the convicted defendant’s prior criminal record (if any), evidence of good character, mental illnesses, age, post-crime behavior, and other factors.</p>
<p><strong>OR:</strong></p>
<p><strong>Option 2:</strong> Judges have no discretion and flexibility when it comes to determining punishment. If a defendant is found guilty of a certain crime, a judge is required by law to sentence them to at least a <a href="http://famm.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Chart-All-Fed-MMs-NW.pdf">set amount</a> of time behind bars as determined by Congress. It’s a one-size-fits-all automatic punishment. The individual circumstances of the case are not taken into consideration. Judges' hands are tied. They are not allowed to reduce the sentence if they determine that the punishment does not fit the crime.</p>
<p>Clearly, option 1 is a better way to ensure justice. This is how the U.S. judicial system used to work when judges were allowed to tailor a punishment fitting of the specific case.</p>
<p>Today, that’s <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/less-imprisonment-doesnt-lead-more-crime">not</a> always the case.</p>
<p>A huge <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/sentencing-reform-let-judges-do-their-jobs">problem</a> is that Congress has dramatically <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/mandatory-minimums-are-not-conservative-approach-criminal-justice">limited</a> judicial discretion and independence over the past few decades. Starting from the 1980’s, Congress has passed a <a href="http://famm.org/mandatory-minimums/">series</a> of mandatory minimum sentencing laws as described in option 2. While supporters of these laws are likely well-intentioned, one-size-fits-all punishment strategies don’t realistically work.</p>
<p>It's time to reconsider mandatory minimum sentencing laws and allow judges to do their job.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Learn More About Mandatory Minimums</div></div></div>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 20:49:44 +0000JBorowski61171 at http://www.freedomworks.orgFed Independence is a Joke, So Why Not Audit?http://www.freedomworks.org/content/fed-independence-joke-so-why-not-audit
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/yellen (1).jpg?itok=dNMvB71s"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/yellen (1).jpg?itok=dNMvB71s" width="480" height="320" alt="Not just bookwormish but also obstinate about secrecy..." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>A <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/173521/obamas-crackdown-whistleblowers">whistleblower-hating</a> president, a bureaucrat who <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/sep/12/emails-ois-lerner-specifically-targeted-tea-party/?page=all">illegally targeted conservatives</a>, and the former national intelligence director who <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/01/27/darrell-issa-james-clapper-lied-to-congress-about-nsa-and-should-be-fired/">lied before Congress</a> walk into a bar.</p>
<p>The bartender says: what can I get “<a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/283335-obama-this-is-the-most-transparent-administration-in-history">the most transparent administration in history</a>”?</p>
<p>If Janet Yellen didn’t resemble a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/27/janet-yellen-has-a-really-valuable-stamp-collection-and-other-highlights-of-fed-disclosures/">bookwormish teetotaler</a>, perhaps she’d join her colleagues in a toast to suppressing democratic accountability. For now, she’ll order a club soda while working vigorously to keep Congress, and thus the people, out of her business of running the country’s central bank.</p>
<p>Yellen has only been Chair of the Federal Reserve for one year, but she’s already facing pressure to open the books from the new Congress. Leading the charge are two statesmen from Kentucky: Representative Thomas Massie and Senator Rand Paul. Both have introduced audit the Fed legislation in their respective chambers.</p>
<p>Wall Street’s cadre of financial oligarchs are predictably <a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/rand-paul-wall-street-2016-elections-115226.html">up in arms</a> over an audit of their <a href="http://mises.org/library/first-line-new-money">free money machine</a>. Think tankers are antagonizing the campaign, with Jim Pethokoukis of the American Enterprise Institute asserting that Sen. Paul has “a poor understanding of what’s actually on the Fed balance sheet and how the bank operates.” It’s expected President Obama would <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/11/us-usa-fed-audit-idUSKBN0LF2K220150211">veto</a> an audit the Fed bill. Even local bankers are scaremongering over the prospect of the Fed losing autonomy.</p>
<p>Yellen, for her part, isn’t about to let the nosy wolves in her henhouse. In a <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/finance/227474-yellen-i-would-forcefully-oppose-audit-the-fed-efforts">recent interview</a>, she said she would stand “forcefully” against any audit measures. She justified her intransigence by citing the importance of “central bank independence” and being able to act without interference.</p>
<p>Nothing says limited government and separation of powers like a bureaucracy unaccountable to the voice of the people! Then again, Yellen doesn’t care much for democratic oversight. She’s a caricature of Randian libertarianism: someone who wants to do whatever, whenever, without rulers. The problem is Yellen isn’t operating a private railroad company. She’s the figurehead for a government institution created by Congress. If democracy means anything, it’s that voters have some measure of control over political bureaucracies.</p>
<p>So apologies Janet, you don’t operate in a bubble (insert Fed pun here). The people - those plain people who think economics is about supply and demand rather than complicated math formulas - deserve some level of sway over the Fed’s operations. So why not an audit by the Government Accountability Office? Last I heard, President Obama was <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOpenGovernment">all about accountability</a>.</p>
<p>Yellen and company aren’t buying it. They don’t want anyone butting in on their micromanagement of the money supply. Outside observers would interfere with the Fed’s independence, which is a sacrament of the central bank.</p>
<p>In an illuminating <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/02/17/qa-explaining-audit-the-fed/">interview</a> with the Wall Street Journal, David Wessel does his best to explain the history of the Federal Reserve and Congress’s long trek to make its internal deliberations more public. For over four decades, the GAO (then called the General Accountability Office) was barred from investigating the Fed. That changed in 1978, when Congress passed a law allowing the GAO to look at the central bank’s “regulatory duties.”</p>
<p>Then the financial crisis of 2008 hit, and the Fed intervened in the financial markets at an unprecedented scale. Banks and Wall Street firms were bailed out to the tune of tens of trillions of dollars. Main Street was left high and dry. Voters were livid and rightfully so.</p>
<p>Congress - after ignominiously bailing out the banks further - expanded the GAO’s authority to examine Fed loans to private companies. With the passage of the Dodd-Frank bill in 2010, the Fed was further opened up, and had to disclose “internal controls, policies on collateral, use of contractors and other activities.” Currently, the GAO is not allowed to review the Fed’s discussions on monetary-policy decisions.</p>
<p>Rand Paul’s audit the Federal Reserve bill eliminates that barrier. And therein lies to the problem according to Fed apologists. As Mr. Wessel tells us, the central bank should be protected from the influence of short-sighted politicians. “[G]iving politicians power over interest rates and the supply of credit hurts an economy over time,” he explains. “Prohibiting the GAO—an arm of Congress–from second-guessing the Fed’s monetary policy decisions is part of that insulation.”</p>
<p>Now, it is indeed true that politicians tend to be myopic in their actions. An $18 trillion debt created by the refusal to don big boy pants and cut spending is indicative of Congress’s systematic immaturity. Having the likes of Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner in charge of the Fed’s printing presses is a startling notion. But that’s not what auditing the Fed accomplishes. There is no language in either the House bill or Senate bill that puts Congress in charge of monetary operations. Fed proponents like Pethokoukis are demagoguing when they say otherwise.</p>
<p>It’s true the Fed’s financial statements are audited every year by the firm Deloitte &amp; Touche. That perfunctory measure didn’t reveal <a href="http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml">the fact</a> that the Fed took advantage of the financial crisis to bail out foreign companies and central banks. Over $16 trillion was <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/4dd95e42-fd6d-11df-a049-00144feab49a.html#axzz3Sm1zlUbY">doled out</a> to foreign institutions like Barclays and UBS. The American public only became aware of the monetary shenanigans because Dodd-Frank contained a partial audit of the Fed’s activities. Had that not happened, we would still be in the dark.</p>
<p>Central bank defenders who scream “independence” over the prospect of an audit are misguided. The idea that political institutions operate in a vacuum and are isolated from outside interests is college-level idealism. It doesn’t pass the smell test. Government officials are primarily interested in perpetuating their power - public good be damned.</p>
<p>Janet Yellen is just as beholden to everyday politics as President Obama. She’s not independent; her job depends on the president’s approval. In a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/business/economy/fed-chief-yellen-testifies-before-congress.html?_r=1">recent testimony</a> before Congress, Yellen wondered aloud, “I really wonder whether or not the Volcker-led Fed would have had the courage to take the hard decisions necessary to bring down inflation and get that finally under control.” What she referred to was the economic calamity that preceded the inauguration of President Ronald Reagan. When the Gipper took office, inflation was raging. Volcker was appointed to the Fed to clamp down on rising prices. This wasn’t popular at first; hiking interest rates tanked the economy. But Reagan stood by Volker, giving him the political cover to follow through. As Washington Post columnist Robert Samuelson <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/robert-samuelson-volcker-reagan-and-history/2015/01/11/9c32e822-982a-11e4-aabd-d0b93ff613d5_story.html">writes</a>,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“[D]uring Volcker’s monetary onslaught, there were many congressional proposals, backed by members of both parties, to curb the Fed’s power, lower interest rates or fire Volcker. If Reagan had endorsed any of them, the Fed would have had to retreat.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Volcker didn’t operate independently. He had the support of the Reagan White House. Just the same, Yellen isn’t free from democratic pressure. She has to obey political headwinds.</p>
<p>If the Fed is not immune from politics, then why keep up the facade of independence? Let’s acknowledge the central bank must answer to the political class. And then let’s look at the past: the Fed’s history is full of backroom deals for elite special interests. That’s not an accident. Darkness gives cover to all sorts of sleazy deeds. An audit would begin the process of weeding out this secrecy.</p>
<p>If the Federal Reserve has nothing to hide, it has nothing to fear, right?</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tell Congress to Audit the Fed!</div></div></div>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 19:06:02 +0000james.miller61170 at http://www.freedomworks.orgLawsuit forces a Nevada county to return innocent people's money illegally taken through civil asset forfeiturehttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/lawsuit-forces-nevada-county-return-innocent-peoples-money-illegally-taken-through-civil
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Policing-for-Profit.jpg?itok=QjS95fY9"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Policing-for-Profit.jpg?itok=QjS95fY9" width="480" height="320" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>In November 2013, Trevor Paine was on his through Humboldt County, Nevada on his way to California when he was stopped by a deputy from local sheriff's department for driving nine miles per hour over the speed limit on I-80. The deputy who stopped him claimed that his police dog had alerted him to something in Paine's vehicle and searched it without his consent.</p>
<p>Though he didn't find any drugs or contraband during the search of Paine's vehicle, the deputy did stumble upon $11,000 in cash in a lockbox, which he subsequently seized through civil asset forfeiture. Obviously, Paine objected to the seizure, but the deputy threatened that if he protested the seizure of his money, his vehicle would be impounded, which would have left him stranded in the desert. Paine was not arrested and charged with a crime, though he was given a warning for speeding, but his money was taken without any cause or evidence.</p>
<p>Without question, local aw enforcement provides the public with a valuable, honorable service. But illegal searches and seizures under civil asset forfeiture laws have become an all too common practice. The <a href="http://www.ij.org/">Institute for Justice</a>, a libertarian public interest firm, <a href="http://www.ij.org/policing-for-profit-the-abuse-of-civil-asset-forfeiture-4">calls this "policing for profit."</a> Many law enforcement agencies items seized under civil asset forfeiture to fund their operations.</p>
<p>Unlike many who have had similar experiences with the Humboldt County Sheriff's Department, Paine decided to fight back. He hired an attorney, John Ohlson, and <a href="http://topclassactions.com/lawsuit-settlements/lawsuit-news/26092-sheriffs-dept-hit-class-action-lawsuit-freeway-cash-seizures/">filed a class action lawsuit against the northern Nevada county</a>. He argued that the search and seizure violated his Fourth Amendment rights.</p>
<p>The lawsuit helped expose eyebrow-rasing abuses of civil asset forfeiture by Humboldt County. In one instance, the same deputy involved in Paine's incident asked a motorist who he'd pulled over on I-80 <a href="http://www.8newsnow.com/story/25379303/i-team-i-80-cash-seizures-by-police-raise-questions">was pretty blunt about his intention</a>. "How much money you guy?" <a href="http://www.cnn.com/videos/justice/2015/01/23/ac-pkg-tuchman-police-asset-seizures-part-two.cnn">the deputy asked</a>. After finding money in the driver's possession, he asked, "That's not yours, is it?" The driver acknowledged that the money was his, to which the deputy said, "Well, I'm seizing it."</p>
<p>Other examples show a similar pattern of behavior. In fact, forfeitures in Humboldt County have increased at an alarming rate. In April 2014, the <em>Reno Gazette-Journal</em> <a href="http://www.rgj.com/story/news/crime/2014/04/09/humboldt-files-flurry-seizure-cases/7529975/">reported</a> that "[t]wenty forfeiture cases — more than the previous four years combined — have been filed by the Humboldt County District Attorney's Office since March 14."</p>
<p>Paine's lawsuit has yielded a positive result that, one would hope, ends Humboldt County's abuse of civil asset forfeiture. Earlier this month, he <a href="http://elkodaily.com/news/humboldt-county-settles-cash-seizure-cases/article_2e1f539b-9c9c-596d-9ab9-18c388a467a2.html">reached a settlement with the sheriff's department</a> under which he'll get back the $11,000 wrongly taken from him, with interest, and his attorney's fee will be paid by the county. The settlement also requires the sheriff's department to contact at least 20 other people whose money was unlawfully taken to let them know that they may be able to get it back.</p>
<p>This is, of course, just a small victory. Most states, including Nevada, still allow law enforcement agencies to, essentially, steal innocent people's stuff under civil asset forfeiture laws and keep the proceeds for themselves. Moreover, state and local law enforcement agencies, even in states that have curtailed this practice, can still coordinate with federal agencies to seize assets under specious circumstances.</p>
<p>Not only are state-level reforms needed to rein in these abuses, but Congress can and should act on meaningful legislation, like the FAIR Act, to disincentivize law enforcement agencies at all levels of government from ignoring innocent Americans' rights.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Watch Julie Borowski&#039;s video on civil asset forfeiture</div></div></div>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 18:50:14 +0000jpye61169 at http://www.freedomworks.orgCrony businesses flock to Washington to lobby for Ex-Im reauthorizationhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/crony-businesses-flock-washington-lobby-ex-im-reauthorization
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/101880641-export-import-bank.1910x1000.jpg?itok=UgxFtgnc"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/101880641-export-import-bank.1910x1000.jpg?itok=UgxFtgnc" width="480" height="251" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The U.S. Chamber of Commerce the National Association of Manufacturers have organized a coalition representing some 700 business leaders to fly-in to Washington DC this week to lobby members of Congress to reauthorize the crony Export-Import Bank before June 30, when its current authorization expires.</p>
<p><em>The Hill</em> reports that the coalition "will participate in nearly 400 Hill meetings — including some with House and Senate leadership." In these meetings, many of which will likely be with House and Senate members who've been quiet about reauthorization, coalition members, many of whom are small business owners, will claim that Ex-Im, an outdated relic of the New Deal, helps their business compete internationally and helps support jobs.</p>
<p>This specious argument is one that Ex-Im's vocal and persistent backers frequently put forward in its efforts to reauthorize the Back. But the fact is, much of the loan assistance that the Bank provides goes to big business. Boeing, Caterpillar, and General Electric, for example, <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/biggest-beneficiaries-ex-im-bank">represent 87 percent</a> of Ex-Im loan guarantees in FY 2013, according to the Mercatus Center. Loan guarantees to these three big businesses totaled over $10.4 billion.</p>
<p>Claims that Ex-Im is beneficial to small businesses fall flat. Reuters examined this back in November and found that Ex-Im <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/export-import-bank-caught-doctoring-data-benefit-big-business-cronies">had misrepresented subsidiaries of 200 big businesses as small businesses</a> -- including firms owned by two of the wealthiest men in the world, Warren Buffett and Carlos Slim. In reality, Ex-Im supports only a fraction -- <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/export-import-bank-assists-tiny-portion-all-us-small-business-jobs-and-firms">less than one-half of 1 percent</a> -- of jobs at small businesses and <a href="http://mercatus.org/publication/jobs-and-export-value-perspective-ex-im-backed-projects-constitute-tiny-portion-total-us">accounts for less than 2 percent of all U.S. exports</a>.</p>
<p>Arguments that Ex-Im should be reauthorized with reform to make it more accountable also falls short. Diane Katz, a research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/02/export-import-bank-impervious-to-reform">explains that the Ex-Im is "impervious to reform,"</a> pointing to several previous reforms mandated by Congress and internal controls with which it has failed to comply.</p>
<p>"Ex-Im has failed to fully comply with risk-management standards. There has been a recent uptick in allegations of serious misconduct by Ex-Im Bank employees. The Office of Inspector General has identified deficiencies in internal controls that reduce the reliability of the bank to ferret out improper payments," <a href="http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/02/export-import-bank-impervious-to-reform">Katz writes</a>. "There also are weaknesses in the bank’s 'Character, Reputational, Transactional Integrity' screening of applicants, as well as a pattern of insufficient due diligence by delegated lenders, specifically lenders with a history of defaulted transactions."</p>
<p>Members of Congress who will receive these businesses in their offices this week should be listening to the outcry against corporate welfare. FreedomWorks activists <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/activists-send-over-20k-messages-congress-do-not-renew-ex-im-bank">have sent over 20,000 messages and phone calls to lawmakers</a> urging them to let the crony Export-Import Bank expire on June 30. These activists realize that the talk of purported reforms is meaningless because Ex-Im is incapable of reform and, unlike many on Capitol Hill, they understand that it's irresponsible and wrong to put taxpayers on the hook for loan guarantees to politically-connected big businesses.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">TELL YOUR CONGRESSMAN NOT TO REAUTHORIZE THE EX-IM BANK</div></div></div>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 15:06:54 +0000jpye61162 at http://www.freedomworks.orgTell Your Representative: Support the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Acthttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-representative-support-permanent-internet-tax-freedom-act
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>As one of our more than 6.9 million FreedomWorks members nationwide, I urge you to contact your representative today and ask him or her to support the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (PITFA), H.R. 235. A bi-partisan proposal introduced by Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), this bill would permanently prohibit taxation of internet access.</p>
<p>Back in 1998, Congress passed the original Internet Tax Freedom Act, a temporary moratorium on taxing internet access. Since then, the Act has been renewed, but is now set to expire on October 1, 2015. If Congress does nothing, states and the federal government would be allowed to tax your internet access by the end of the year.</p>
<p>The Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act does more than just extend the deadline, it makes the tax moratorium permanent. A number of states would immediately begin collecting taxes on broadband internet service if the ban were to expire.</p>
<p>FreedomWorks recognizes the transformative power of the internet to facilitate commerce and the free flow of information. Permitting taxation of the internet unjustly and discriminatorily burdens internet businesses and allows government new power to restrict the freedom of information. The Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act is a major part of protecting internet freedom for all.</p>
<p>You need only look at your cell phone or cable bills to see how the government takes its share of your bill for those services – but you can stop them from doing the same to your internet service,. I hope you’ll call your representative and ask him or her to support the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, H.R. 235, and to co-sponsor the bill if they have not already done so.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Matt Kibbe<br />
President and CEO,
FreedomWorks</p>
<p>Check out our letter of support for the Senate version of this bill <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-senators-support-internet-tax-freedom-forever-act">HERE</a>.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-files field-type-file field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Files:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="///d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/LoS%202015-02-19%20-%20Support%20-%20Permanent%20Internet%20Tax%20Freedom%20Act%20%28H.R.%20235%29.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=445370">LoS 2015-02-19 - Support - Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act (H.R. 235).pdf</a></span></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tell your Representative to support internet tax freedom here!</div></div></div>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 04:35:29 +0000mkibbe61168 at http://www.freedomworks.orgWho Rules the Internet? FCC Bureaucratshttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/who-rules-internet-fcc-bureaucrats
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/freedom.jpg?itok=QisogmAr"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/freedom.jpg?itok=QisogmAr" width="450" height="265" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><h3><strong><a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/democracy-and-power-101">Democracy and Power 101: Government is Power</a></strong></h3>
<p><em>The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.</em> —James Madison, Speech in the Virginia State Convention of 1829-1830</p>
<h4><strong>FCC Bureaucrats to Rule the Internet</strong></h4>
<p>Freedom of speech is absolutely indispensable for human freedom and progress. In the mid 15th Century, the invention of the printing press ushered in a period of mass communication, and the books of Martin Luther and others permanently changed the thought, culture, religion and governance of our world.</p>
<p>Today, the Internet has increased our levels of communication giving millions of Americans more knowledge on how government functions as well as its impact on citizens’ perception of government. There is no doubt, the Internet influences how Americans vote.</p>
<p>Obviously, government is threatened, and this Thursday <em>three</em> members of the Federal Communication Commission (all Democrats) intend to place the Internet under the control of the FCC. The FCC will have the power to choose what “charges” and practices” are “just and reasonable.”</p>
<p>As <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/l-gordon-crovitz-from-internet-to-obamanet-1424644324">reported</a> in the <em>Wall Street Journal,</em> L. Gordon Crovitz explains the power and reach of “just and reasonable.”</p>
<blockquote>
<p>*Information Age** Bureaucrats can review the fairness of Google ’s search results, Facebook ’s news feeds and news sites’ links to one another and to advertisers.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Worse, the FCC empowers political favorites to coerce their rivals. Again Crovitz:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>BlackBerry is already lobbying the FCC to force Apple and Netflix to offer apps for BlackBerry’s unpopular phones.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Dangerously the bureaucrats have more power:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bureaucrats will oversee peering, content-delivery networks and other parts of the interconnected network that enables everything from Netflix and YouTube to security drones and online surgery.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The power play to control the Internet started in late September when the Obama Administration concocted a media campaign to coerce the FCC. A White House meeting was called and, according to the <em><a href="http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/23/obamas-move-to-regulate-internet-has-activists-fingerprints-all-over-it/?print=1#comments_controls">Daily Caller</a></em>, these political activists attended: Free Press, Fight for the Future, Demand Progress, Daily Kos, Public Knowledge and several others.</p>
<p>Individual meeting attendees also included PR, media and campaign strategists Michael Khoo, Karley Kranich and Cheryl Leanza from Spitfire Strategies and A Learned Hand as well as Martha Allen with The Women’s Institute for Freedom of the Press.</p>
<p>In November, President Obama released a video pressing the FCC to control the Internet. <em>The Daily Caller</em> reports that Fight for the Future immediately claimed credit for Obama’s video:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Obama’s statement has this movement’s fingerprints all over it, and it wouldn’t have happened without our work together. We’re proud. You should be too. I can’t think of a better time to make your first donation to this movement.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On December 2, Holmes Wilson of Fight for the Future sent an email to activists claiming that netroots activists facilitated the circumstances for the Obama announcement in November.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“We were in close contact with the White House, and it was pretty clear they were only going to move once they were sure it was something that would gain them broad public support and have minimal downside. Our coalition created the circumstances in which they could move.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Dangerously, this Thursday three bureaucrats, surreptitiously taking orders from the President, intend to control the Internet. Wrongfully, President Obama and the netroots activists have intentionally by-passed our Constitutional order. Only Congress has the power to make laws. This is a <em>terrible</em> abuse of power of which James Madison and our Founders abhorred.</p>
<p>Even more dangerous, our freedom of speech is greatly endangered.</p>
</div></div></div>Thu, 26 Feb 2015 01:28:57 +0000teda61167 at http://www.freedomworks.orgTell Your Senators: Support the Internet Tax Freedom Forever Acthttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-senators-support-internet-tax-freedom-forever-act
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>As one of our more than 6.9 million FreedomWorks members nationwide, I urge you to contact your senators today and ask them to support the Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act, S. 431. A bi-partisan proposal introduced by Senator John Thune (R-S.D.), this bill would permanently prohibit taxation of internet access.</p>
<p>Back in 1998, Congress passed the original Internet Tax Freedom Act, a temporary moratorium on taxing internet access. Since then, the Act has been renewed, but is now set to expire on October 1, 2015. If Congress does nothing, states and the federal government would be allowed to tax your internet access by the end of the year.</p>
<p>The Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act does more than just extend the deadline, it makes the tax moratorium permanent. A number of states would immediately begin collecting taxes on broadband internet service if the ban were to expire.</p>
<p>FreedomWorks recognizes the transformative power of the internet to facilitate commerce and the free flow of information. Permitting taxation of the internet unjustly and discriminatorily burdens internet businesses and allows government new power to restrict the freedom of information. The Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act is a major part of protecting internet freedom for all.</p>
<p>You need only look at your cell phone or cable bills to see how the government takes its share of your bill for those services – but you can stop them from doing the same to your internet service. I hope you’ll call your senators and ask them to support the Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act, S. 431, and to co-sponsor the bill if they have not already done so.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Matt Kibbe<br />
President and CEO,
FreedomWorks</p>
<p>Check out our letter supporting the House version of this bill <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-representative-support-permanent-internet-tax-freedom-act">HERE</a>.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-files field-type-file field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Files:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="///d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/LoS%202015-02-19%20-%20Support%20-%20Internet%20Tax%20Freedom%20Forever%20Act%20%28S.%20431%29.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=441319">LoS 2015-02-19 - Support - Internet Tax Freedom Forever Act (S. 431).pdf</a></span></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tell Your Senators: Support internet tax freedom here!</div></div></div>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 22:14:51 +0000mkibbe61166 at http://www.freedomworks.orgChicago Nightmare Prison Showcases the Dangers of Police Militarizationhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/chicago-nightmare-prison-showcases-dangers-police-militarization
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/HomanPrison.php_.jpg?itok=IxKxMQMG"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/HomanPrison.php_.jpg?itok=IxKxMQMG" width="470" height="245" alt="This Chicago prison is an alleged chamber of horrors." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Prisons, when used correctly, serve an important purpose of keeping violent criminals off the street and protecting the general population. But one prison in Chicago is allegedly operating less like an instrument of law enforcement, and more like a military installation.</p>
<p>The prison at Homan Square on the south side of Chicago is facing allegations of <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/24/chicago-police-detain-americans-black-site">gross rights violations</a> and abuses of power. According to the Guardian, the prison detains people without properly charging them with a crime, and denies them access to legal representation. Attorneys have reported that they were prevented from seeing their clients by prison staff, although Chicago police have vehemently <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-police-guardian-story-met-20150224-story.html">denied</a> these claims.</p>
<p>There are also reports of violent beatings, and even some deaths as a result of the brutality that allegedly takes place behind the prison’s walls. While the vast majority of police work hard to honestly serve and protect the citizenry, a lack of oversight and a trend towards militarization makes problems like this harder to avoid.</p>
<p>Criminologist and executive director of the Chicago Justice Project notes that the people being held in Homan Square are <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2015/02/behind-the-disappeared-of-chicagos-homan-square/385964/">not suspected terrorists,</a> but largely minor criminals. Therefore, military-style suspension of the Bill of Rights is wholly inappropriate and very worrying.</p>
<p>A retired Washington, DC homicide detective, James Trainum, expressed shock and dismay at the allegations, noting that if they are true, such abuses would be unprecedented in his experience.</p>
<p>“I’ve never known any kind of organized, secret place where they go and just hold somebody before booking for hours and hours and hours. That scares the hell out of me that that even exists or might exist,” he said.</p>
<p>All of this goes hand in hand with the increased militarization of police forces within the United States. Police are meant to serve and protect; they should be viewed as defenders of freedom and allies to the communities in which they serve. They serve a different function from the military, and the two should never be confused. Placing military equipment in the hands of police and authorizing them to use military tactics against domestic criminals creates an adversarial, fear-based relationship between law enforcement and the people they are supposed to protect.</p>
<p>Illinois police have received thousands of pieces of military equipment, including 16 military helicopters, from the Pentagon, fostering the us-versus-them tactics on display at Homan Square.</p>
<p>The principles of due process and innocent until proven guilty are sacrosanct in the American justice system, and it is therefore important that we take accusations that these rights are being denied to the innocent very seriously. We need to restore the relationship of trust between police and their communities, and the only way to do that is to be on guard against abuses of power when we see them.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tell us your story about criminal justice abuse</div></div></div>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:57:27 +0000logan.albright61172 at http://www.freedomworks.orgFreedomWorks at the Arizona YAL conventionhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/freedomworks-arizona-yal-convention
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/1_21.jpg?itok=5tdGzlep"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/1_21.jpg?itok=5tdGzlep" width="480" height="161" alt="" /></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/2a.jpg?itok=-o_U0PRY"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/2a.jpg?itok=-o_U0PRY" width="480" height="222" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Hi, I’m Brady Bowyer, President of Young Americans for Liberty at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, and a longtime supporter of FreedomWorks’ grassroots action to reclaim our liberty. This weekend, myself and a crew of activists from the Las Vegas area made the trip to Arizona State University to volunteer for FreedomWorks at the Arizona Young Americans for Liberty state convention. This was YAL’s first state convention in Arizona, and the turnout was great. Over 120 liberty-minded students and community members from around the region came to enjoy a day of activism training and hear great speakers.</p>
<p>They were also excited to hear from the event’s many sponsors, especially FreedomWorks! Many attendees stopped by to learn more about FreedomWorks’ current projects fighting civil asset forfeiture, common core, and the big government tax-and-spend policies that hurt our generation. We signed up dozens of new members and gave away plenty of FreedomWorks gear! It was a great time and I think everybody in attendance left the convention with new knowledge, friends, and the tools they need to fight for our future!</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Check out what FreedomWorks did at the latest Students for Liberty Conference</div></div></div>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 18:28:53 +0000Brady Bowyer61164 at http://www.freedomworks.orgDemocrat Commits a “Mortal Sin” - Criticizes Obama on ISIShttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/democrat-commits-%E2%80%9Cmortal-sin%E2%80%9D-criticizes-obama-isis
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/tulsi-gabbard.jpg?itok=Yy5iOaKn"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/tulsi-gabbard.jpg?itok=Yy5iOaKn" width="400" height="300" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><h3><strong><a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/democracy-and-power-112">Democracy and Power 112: Fidelity to Leadership</a></strong></h3>
<p>To be elected, a politician must please his or her constituents. However, to be a powerful legislative force, a politician must be an obedient member of a party – Democrat or Republican.</p>
<h4><strong>Democrat Commits a “Mortal Sin” - Criticizes Obama on ISIS</strong></h4>
<p>Representative Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI), a twice-deployed veteran, recently criticized President Obama for downplaying our ISIS threat.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Every soldier knows this simple fact: If you don’t know your enemy, you will not be able to defeat him,” Rep. Gabbard <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/28/tulsi-gabbard-rising-dem-star-committed-mortal-sin/">was quoted by Fox News</a>. “Our leaders must clearly identify the enemy as Islamist extremists, understand the ideology that is motivating them and attracting new recruits, and focus on defeating that enemy both militarily and ideologically.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Her statement was true, clearly stated and critical to our national interest and defense. However, it was also political blasphemy. It violated her fidelity to the Democrat leadership, especially to our President.</p>
<p>Immediately, the Democrat attack machine responded. “I take serious issue when somebody who’s done a little non-fighting in Iraq, and is not a Middle East or Islamic scholar, claims to know better than our President and Secretary of State how to fathom the motivations of terrorists, or how to refer to them beyond the term that best describes them — terrorists,” said Bob Jones of the Oahu-based Midweek.</p>
<p>Michael Perry of Hawaii’s KSSK radio worried about the political pay back for her “mortal sin.” “While Gabbard is correct in her ‘emperor has no clothes’ moment, she may have lost her future seat on Hawaii’s political bench.”</p>
<p>In the past, the “party leaders” have harshly penalized apostate party members. Speakers <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/pelosi-and-power">Pelosi</a> (D-CA) and <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/republicans-backbone-against-boehner-speaker">Boehner</a> (R-OH) have removed members from select committees and withheld campaign contributions.</p>
<p>These “party leadership” machinations indicate the control and power of our political elites – Democrats and Republicans - and harms America's future.</p>
</div></div></div>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 15:00:42 +0000teda61183 at http://www.freedomworks.orgWhy the Ex-Im Bank Must Die, Expressed in Parks and Rec GIFshttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/why-ex-im-bank-must-die-expressed-parks-and-rec-gifs
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/ron-swanson-1.jpg?itok=ynny5lsH"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/ron-swanson-1.jpg?itok=ynny5lsH" width="480" height="269" alt="Ron Swanson knows that the Ex-Im Bank is just another example of government waste and corruption." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The United States Export-Import Bank is a corporate welfare program that gives taxpayer-backed loans and subsidies to some of the country's <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/guess-which-company-gains-most-export-import-bank">largest corporations</a>, like Boeing and General Electric, that are already...</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/jVrIC5w.gif" alt="flushwithcash" /></p>
<p>The Ex-Im Bank also gives loans to <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/enough-enough-ex-im-bank-subsidizing-rich-australians-now">foreign companies</a>, even <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/ex-im%E2%80%99s-green-energy-corruption-goes-deeper-solyndra">blatantly corrupt</a> ones like Abengoa, and special interest green energy projects like Solyndra.</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/fKKbQK0.gif" alt="excuseme" /></p>
<p>The Ex-Im Bank was founded <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/ex-im-bank-and-other-screwy-new-deal-programs">80 years ago</a> as part of FDR's failed New Deal during the Great Depression. Why do we still need it today?</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/DbfyAlN.gif" alt="Idontgetit" /></p>
<p>Now Congress is talking about <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/ex-im-bank-do-you-side-hillary-warren-and-reid">reauthorizing</a> the bank for another five years.</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/RxMHWxk.gif" alt="rethinkthatmove" /></p>
<p>Even though Obama himself said that the Bank was <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/obamas-ex-im-flip-flop">"little more than a fund for corporate welfare"</a> in 2008.</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/ozAc9yBm.jpg" alt="Swansoncorporatewelfare" /></p>
<p>Your tax dollars shouldn't go towards propping up corrupt companies that don't need the money anyway.</p>
<p><img src="https://freethefuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/4101.jpg" alt="swansontaxes" /></p>
<p>This is America. Companies should compete on a level playing field, not get special handouts from the government.</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/gE52LDM.jpg" alt="swansoncapitalism" /></p>
<p>So, what do you tell your congressman if they try to vote for Ex-Im reauthorization?</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/bjkfld9.gif" alt="knopeno" /></p>
<p>That's right.</p>
<!-- Images -->
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tell Congress to End the Ex-Im Bank</div></div></div>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:57:46 +0000logan.albright61161 at http://www.freedomworks.orgNet Neutrality Wrapup: What Does the FCC's Decision Mean?http://www.freedomworks.org/content/net-neutrality-wrapup-what-does-fccs-decision-mean
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/FCCcommish.jpg?itok=TnwOPeJW"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/FCCcommish.jpg?itok=TnwOPeJW" width="480" height="321" alt="These are the people who took away your internet freedom." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Today, the Federal Communications Commission<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/technology/net-neutrality-fcc-vote-internet-utility.html?_r=0"> voted 3-2</a> in favor of a controversial proposal to regulate the internet as a public utility, similar to telephone calls. The vote came as expected, down party lines with the three Democrats supporting and the two Republicans opposed. The decision is no surprise, but it leaves us with two questions that need to be answered: What does this mean, and where do we go from here?</p>
<p>First, it means a lot. Title II of the Telecommunications Act, under which internet service providers will now be classified, along with section 706 of the same Act, grant the FCC broad powers over private companies. Among the things the FCC will allowed to do are <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/issue-analysis-title-ii-regulation-internet">the following:</a></p>
<ul><li>Demand free service in time of emergency.</li>
<li>Fine or imprison people for distributing <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/what-title-ii-regulation-internet-actually-means">lewd or offensive</a> content.</li>
<li>Force taxpayers to support rural broadband expansion.</li>
<li>Allow anyone to file nuisance lawsuits against ISPs, without demonstrating harm.</li>
<li>Regulate the rates ISPs charge.</li>
<li>Force ISPs to pay into a Universal Service Fund - essentially a tax that gets passed onto consumers.</li>
</ul><p>With respect to the last two points, the FCC claims that they will use “forbearance,” meaning they will not actually enforce them. But history teaches us that the government rarely demands powers it has no intention of using, and any respite from these rules is almost certain to be temporary.</p>
<p>While the FCC’s plan does not directly regulate content, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) has suggested that <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/fec-proposes-regulate-internet">political speech</a> on the internet should be regulated. No that the internet will be consider a public utility, there is little to stop efforts to impose broader content requirements, reminiscent of the infamous Fairness Doctrine.</p>
<p>The scope of these new regulations is well summed up in this tweet from Republican FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai:</p>
<p><img src="http://i.imgur.com/4gylnAi.png" alt="AjitPai" /></p>
<p>The answer to the second question is a little more complex. While the FCC has made its decision, there are still three ways that we could reverse the decision and take back a free internet. The ways to do this are executive, legislative, and judicial.</p>
<p>The judicial solution would be to challenge the FCC in court. In 2010, a federal appeals court struck down an earlier attempt by the commission to implement Net Neutrality, and even now lawsuits are being mounted, so there is a chance that the decision will be ruled unconstitutional. However, no lawsuit can proceed until the new rule is published in the federal register, which will not happen for some months, so this will be a long and time-consuming process.</p>
<p>The executive solution will take even longer. Since FCC commissioners are appointed by the executive branch, a Republican president in 2017 could conceivably install new regulators, at which point the agency could reverse its interpretation of the Telecommunications Act. Again, this is a long-term solution.</p>
<p>Finally, Congress could act legislatively to amend the Telecommunications Act to specifically preclude the FCC’s interpretation. Legislative fixes have already been <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/battle-internet-freedom-not-over">attempted,</a> but of course, this would also require a Republican president to sign the legislation into law.</p>
<p>In short, the battle for internet freedom lives on, but the next step is going to be a long, slow one that will take dedication and perseverance for years to come.</p>
<!-- Images -->
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Watch the Liberty Beats video on internet freedom</div></div></div>Wed, 25 Feb 2015 14:09:15 +0000logan.albright61173 at http://www.freedomworks.orgJonathan Gruber in 2013: States that don't set up ObamaCare exchanges put subsidies at riskhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/jonathan-gruber-2013-states-dont-set-obamacare-exchanges-put-subsidies-risk
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Screen Shot 2015-02-24 at 5.43.40 PM.png?itok=8hPQ4BkD"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Screen Shot 2015-02-24 at 5.43.40 PM.png?itok=8hPQ4BkD" width="480" height="280" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Another interview has surfaced in which Jonathan Gruber, the MIT economist whose <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmolioUklXI&amp;feature=youtu.be&amp;t=8m53s">bragged about being involved in writing ObamaCare</a>, suggested that subsidies will not be available to consumers in states that don't set up health insurance exchanges under the so-called "Affordable Care Act."</p>
<p>In <a href="http://digital.employeebenefitadviser.com/employeebenefitadviser/201303_def?folio=54#pg56">a March 2013 interview wth <em>Employee Benefit Adviser</em></a>, via <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/24/jonathan-grubers-excuse-for-his-obamacar">Reason</a>, Gruber, who's <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/make-two-times-obamacares-architect-called-american-voters-stupid">called Americans "stupid"</a> and <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/watch-obamacares-architect-brag-about-deceptive-tactics-used-pass-health-law">boasted about the lack of transparency</a> in ObamaCare, praised the states that had set up exchanges, but warned that "other states" that were "playing a terrible political game at the cost of their state residents in not developing exchanges." He also bemoaned states that refused to participate in ObamaCare as "stick-it-to-the-man conservative states that are trying to make political hay out of doing nothing."</p>
<p>Though he doesn't outright say that the law was written to allow subsidies to consumers in only the states that set up ObamaCare exchanges, the language is very similar to past statements he's made. In January 2012, for example, Gruber said, in very plain terms, that states that ObamaCare authorizes subsidy payments only to states have exchanges.</p>
<p>"I think, what’s important to remember politically about this is if you’re a state and you don’t set up an exchange, that means your citizens don’t get their tax credits — but your citizens still pay the taxes that support this bill. So you’re essentially saying to your citizens you’re going to pay all the taxes to help all the other states in the country," <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBAHvX1WdWc">said Gruber</a>. "I hope that that’s a blatant enough political reality that states will get their act together and realize there are billions of dollars at stake here in setting up these exchanges and that they'll do it."</p>
<p>Though, in December, <a href="http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Gruber-Statement-12-9-ObamaCare1.pdf">he told the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee</a> that his comments were taken out of context (<a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/jonathan-gruber-contradicted-himself-availability-obamacare-subsidies-big-way">they weren't</a>), Gruber's comments are central to the <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/king-v-burwell-could-be-blessing%E2%80%A6-or-curse">upcoming Supreme Court hearing in <em>King v. Burwell</em></a>. Petitioners to the Court are disputing the promulgation of an illegal rule by the IRS that would allow subsidy payments to states that haven't set up ObamaCare exchanges.</p>
<p>The Obama administration <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/233677-no-back-up-plan-if-court-rules-against-obamacare-burwell-says">has already indicated that it doesn't have a backup plan</a> if the Court strikes the IRS rule down, in a decision that would likely come this summer. Moreover, Republican governors <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/233459-governors-lobbying-congress-for-obamacare-scotus-fix">are showing signs of nervousness about <em>King</em></a>, suggesting that they will push Congress to act in some way.</p>
<p>If Republicans are serious about getting rid of ObamaCare, a law that <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html">remains unpopular with the American public</a>, they need to <a href="http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/233459-governors-lobbying-congress-for-obamacare-scotus-fix">put forward an alternative</a> before the Supreme Court rules in <em>King</em>.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Read FreedomWorks&#039; 10 Principles for Replacing ObamaCare</div></div></div>Tue, 24 Feb 2015 22:54:29 +0000jpye61160 at http://www.freedomworks.orgThe NSA May Be Spying on You through Your Computer's Hard Drivehttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/nsa-may-be-spying-you-through-your-computers-hard-drive
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/computerspy.jpg?itok=qC39zeF7"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/computerspy.jpg?itok=qC39zeF7" width="480" height="324" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The NSA could literally be inside your computer.</p>
<p>A couple years ago, most people would probably dismiss this as a tin-foil hat conspiracy theory. However, with the Snowden leaks <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/nsa-collects-significantly-more-data-non-targets-actual-targets">revealing</a> that the NSA is mass collecting Americans’ phone records and nearly everything you do online—it doesn’t seem as crazy.</p>
<p>Russian security software maker Kaspersky lab recently <a href="https://securelist.com/files/2015/02/Equation_group_questions_and_answers.pdf">released</a> a report saying that it has found government spying software on hard drives in personal computers in the United States. You have no way of knowing whether it’s in your computer or not.</p>
<p>Several former intelligence operatives have <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/16/us-usa-cyberspying-idUSKBN0LK1QV20150216">confirmed</a> that such government spying software exists and that the NSA has the ability to hide it in hard drives. NSA officials refused to comment. A spokesperson only <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/02/23/us-usa-cybersecurity-idUSKBN0LR1MN20150223">said</a> that “we fully comply with the law.”</p>
<p>Though, fully complying with the law and not violating the Constitution are often two different things. For example, it’s clear that Section 215 of the Patriot Act violates the 4th Amendment—which forbids against unreasonable searches and seizures.</p>
<p>Section 215 has made it legal for the government to <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/5-reason-oppose-section-215-patriot-act">spy</a> on Americans who are not even suspected of a crime. The controversial section has <a href="https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/215_one_pager_f_adv.pdf">authorized</a> the NSA to <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/no-marco-rubio-congress-shouldnt-permanently-reauthorize-patriot-act">collect</a> phone and Internet records of every single American without even a warrant.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/get-ready-another-showdown-nsa-spying">good news</a> is that Section 215 <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-rep-do-not-vote-patriot-act-reauthorization">expires</a> on June 1st. There are a growing <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-rep-do-not-vote-patriot-act-reauthorization">number</a> of representatives who refuse to vote for a “clean” reauthorization of Section 215. Even Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), one of the authors of the Patriot Act, has said that this provision has been abused.</p>
<p>Rep. Sensenbrenner <a href="http://sensenbrenner.house.gov/uploadedfiles/sensenbrenner_letter_to_attorney_general_eric_holder.pdf">writes</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The administration has collected the details of every call made by every American, even the overwhelming majority of these calls have nothing to do with terrorism. In passing Section 215, Congress intended to allow the government access to specific records. The administration’s interpretation to allow for bulk collection is at odds with Congressional intent and with both the plain and legal meanings of “relevance."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>It is insane that the government may have spyware in the computers of ordinary citizens. Clearly, we need to stand up to these abuses and ensure that unconstitutional spying is not legal!</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Take Action!</div></div></div>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 22:24:12 +0000JBorowski61158 at http://www.freedomworks.org10 Principles for Replacing ObamaCarehttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/10-principles-replacing-obamacare
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Since the passage of ObamaCare in 2010, critics of the law have endured the criticism that we’re all about opposition, without providing constructive alternatives for health care reform. The truth is closer to the polar opposite – if anything, we suffer from a surplus, rather than a deficit, of comprehensive plans to repeal and replace ObamaCare.</p>
<p>This seems like a rather good problem to have, given that our entire philosophy is based upon encouraging innovation and competition. But, having many different alternatives is only useful to the extent that they are moving towards a common set of principles. We can all agree to support “patient-centered care” (and that’s a good start), but what does that really mean?</p>
<p>To answer this question, FreedomWorks has released a set of ten principles of health care reform that we believe any ObamaCare replacement plan should follow:</p>
<p style=" margin: 12px auto 6px auto; font-family: Helvetica,Arial,Sans-serif; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 14px; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; -x-system-font: none; display: block;"> <a title="View FreedomWorks' 10 Principles for Replacing ObamaCare on Scribd" href="https://www.scribd.com/doc/256700472/FreedomWorks-10-Principles-for-Replacing-ObamaCare" style="text-decoration: underline;">FreedomWorks' 10 Principles for Replacing ObamaCare</a> by <a title="View Joshua Withrow's profile on Scribd" href="https://www.scribd.com/joshua_withrow" style="text-decoration: underline;">Joshua Withrow</a></p>
<iframe class="scribd_iframe_embed" src="https://www.scribd.com/embeds/256700472/content?start_page=1&amp;view_mode=scroll&amp;access_key=key-SDpeCDTkcwPw6wUWfjIl&amp;show_recommendations=false" data-auto-height="false" data-aspect-ratio="0.7729220222793488" scrolling="no" id="doc_25847" width="100%" height="600" frameborder="0"></iframe>
</div></div></div>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 21:43:12 +0000jwithrow61157 at http://www.freedomworks.orgA Rally of Appreciation for Opposing Boehner's Re-Election for Speakerhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/rally-appreciation-opposing-boehners-re-election-speaker
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/1_20.JPG?itok=UFxIaP7p"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/1_20.JPG?itok=UFxIaP7p" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/2_20.JPG?itok=1GIKCt0r"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/2_20.JPG?itok=1GIKCt0r" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/3_20.JPG?itok=HA_Y8oIX"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/3_20.JPG?itok=HA_Y8oIX" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div><div class="field-item odd" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/4_18.JPG?itok=gzn1f4O8"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/4_18.JPG?itok=gzn1f4O8" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/b1_1.JPG?itok=AwELtxxb"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/b1_1.JPG?itok=AwELtxxb" width="480" height="260" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Last Saturday, over 200 conservative activists came together to honor Congressman Jim Bridenstine of Oklahoma for his courageous vote against John Boehner’s re-election for speaker. The event was organized by Tulsa 9/12 Project President, Ronda Vuillemont-Smith. Ronda did an incredible job bringing together activists from across the state to make the event an awesome success.</p>
<p>Why was this event such a big deal?</p>
<p>To be frank, it's hard to do the right thing in Congress. From the moment Members are elected, they face intense lobbying from every special interest group under the sun.</p>
<p>As Congressman Bridenstine explained at the event:</p>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Clx1SEN0wLs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<blockquote>
<p>"…You get to Washington and everything favors the status quo. If you want to raise money from the lobbyists and the political action committees in Washington DC, you’ve got to favor the status quo, because the lobbyists, the political action committees, and all the people who fund your campaign, in both parties, support the status quo. You want to get your name on a bill, you gotta support the status quo. Some of us have had our [bill sponsorships] removed from bills because they needed them to pass, and they didn’t want them to pass with my name on it. It happens.</p>
<p>If you want to chair a subcommittee, or chair a full committee, you gotta support the status quo. If you want to move up the ladder in seniority, you gotta support the status quo. So everything, when you look at Washington, DC, everything supports the status quo. And when people get there, they learn this, they understand it and all of a sudden, they’re supporting the status quo."</p>
</blockquote>
<p>And despite all this pressure, Rep. Bridenstine continues to not only vote right (he has a 98% lifetime score with FreedomWorks), but is a leader in the Liberty Caucus in the House. He was the <strong>first</strong> Congressman to publicly oppose Boehner, and his leadership caused a break in the dam that resulted in 23 of his colleagues joining him opposing the Speaker.</p>
<p>When a grassroots conservative like Rep. Bridenstine does the right thing, we need to remember to thank them. If we’re going to make freedom work in Washington, its going to be through one tough vote at a time.</p>
</div></div></div>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 21:42:06 +0000Noah Wall61155 at http://www.freedomworks.orgCapitol Hill Update, 23 February, 2015http://www.freedomworks.org/content/capitol-hill-update-23-february-2015
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Hill Update Header_19.jpg?itok=61DjxBZd"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Hill Update Header_19.jpg?itok=61DjxBZd" width="480" height="270" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p><strong>Capitol Hill Update, 23 February, 2014</strong></p>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4IIXCUI0nZQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<p><strong>House &amp; Senate/Schedule:</strong> Both chambers are back in town this week. The House will recess next during the week of March 9-12, while the Senate will remain in town until the two-week Spring Recess, beginning March 30.</p>
<p><strong>Legislative Highlight:</strong> The big business in town this week all centers around funding for the Department of Homeland Security, which is set to expire at the end of this week. The current bill, H.R. 240, is sitting in the Senate, where Senate Democrats have repeatedly block any attempt to even debate the bill because it strips funding for the implementation of President Obama’s unconstitutional executive actions on immigration. Perhaps more important than the content of the bill itself is its implications for any other legislative struggles this year. The Senate Democrats have become used to getting their way on absolutely everything since 2008, and expect that if they hold their ground (their 46 votes are enough to kill most bills in the Senate) the Republicans will cave to their every demand. If the GOP confirms these expectations, it bodes poorly for the rest of this Congress.</p>
<p><strong>House/ Education:</strong> On Thursday, the House is scheduled to vote on H.R. 5, the Student Success Act. Sponsored by Rep. John Kline (R-MN), this bill would reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which has actually been lapsed for several years (but which Congress has continued funding anyway). Although the bill does contain some good reforms, in the end it still leaves in place a federal testing standards requirement under No Child Left Behind, keeping a prominent federal role in education.</p>
<p><strong>Regulatory Deadline:</strong> On Friday the 27th, the FCC is expected to vote to implement a rule that would allow the internet to be regulated as a public utility. You can read a detailed analysis of how dangerous this regulation is to internet freedom <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/internet-5-people-decide-its-future">HERE</a>. Once passed, the only recourse is for Congress to pass a bill (which seems unlikely) or for a court case to find their actions unconstitutional (which has happened before).</p>
<p><strong>Health Care Reform:</strong> FreedomWorks has just released our Ten Principles for Replacing ObamaCare, which is intended to be a set of guidelines for evaluating the various conservative plans for reforming health care. Take a look at the principles <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/10-principles-replacing-obamacare">HERE</a>!</p>
</div></div></div>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 21:30:43 +0000jwithrow61156 at http://www.freedomworks.orgPatricia Arquette and Women's Rightshttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/patricia-arquette-and-womens-rights
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Patricia-Arquette.jpg?itok=UyODRuFj"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Patricia-Arquette.jpg?itok=UyODRuFj" width="480" height="360" alt="Patricia Arquette: Fine actress, lousy pundit." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Did you watch the Oscars last night? I only caught a few highlights, including Lady Gaga’s excellent tribute to The Sound of Music and Patricia Arquette’s ill-informed diatribe on women’s rights.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, I thought Boyhood was a great movie, and Arquette thoroughly deserved her Oscar. But her comments, both on the stage and behind it, display a troubling misunderstanding of rights and statistics.</p>
<p>Chatting backstage after her acceptance speech, Arquette <a href="http://www.eonline.com/news/628554/patricia-arquette-elaborates-on-her-oscars-acceptance-speech-backstage-says-equal-means-equal">said the following:</a></p>
<p>"The truth is, the older women get, the less money they make...the highest percentage of children living in poverty are female-headed households, and it's inexcusable that we go around the world and we talk about equal rights for women in other countries and we don't...have equal rights for women in America and we don't because when they wrote the Constitution, they didn't intend it for women."</p>
<p>Okay, there’s a lot in that. Let’s break it down.</p>
<p>First of all, it’s unclear what earning less money as you get older has to do with rights. It’s equally unclear why she would attribute something with obvious cause - poverty in single-parent homes - to some sort of rights violation. What rights do men have in America that women do not? Is it a right to force other people to pay you money, and should the law force families to stay together or prohibit women from getting pregnant to address the problems she bemoans? Clearly not.</p>
<p>One can only assume that the root of her complaint is the mythical wage gap that the left keeps repeating, no matter how many times it is debunked. You’ve no doubt heard this statistic: “women earn 70 percent of what men earn for doing the same work.”</p>
<p>If it sounds shocking, it’s because it’s not true. Not even remotely. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports that across the country, the average woman makes about <a href="http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat37.htm">82 percent</a> of what the average man does (the 70 percent statistic hasn’t been true <a href="http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpswom2012.pdf">since the 80s</a>). There is no effort to correct for different types of employment, seniority, industry, productivity, or any other factor that might affect wages. When you correct for these other factors, <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=1yW1h97KIJAC&amp;lpg=PA173&amp;ots=POKLVvl-yn&amp;dq=walter%20block%20male-female%20earnings%20and%20equal%20pay%20legislation&amp;pg=PA174#v=onepage&amp;q=walter%20block%20male-female%20earnings%20and%20equal%20pay%20legislation&amp;f=false">the wage gap disappears.</a></p>
<p>To conclude that the data from BLS demonstrated some sort of institutional discrimination or a violation of women’s rights makes as much sense noting that 18-year-olds make less than 40-year-olds, and concluding that institutional ageism is the reason. Women make different choices than men. They work different hours, go into different industries, and tend to take more time off for family reasons. These choices, not a lack of women’s rights, are the true source of the wage gap.</p>
<p>To embrace the alternative viewpoint requires us to believe that American entrepreneurs are so sexist that they willingly spend 40 percent more on labor than they have to, just to keep women down. My colleague Julie Borowski has <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/real-talk-julie-borowski-episode-2-equal-pay-debate-1">covered</a> <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/5-real-things-you-should-know-about-paycheck-fairness-act">this topic</a> <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/myth-gender-wage-gap">extensively.</a></p>
<p>Arquette went on to say:</p>
<p>"The truth is: even though we sort of feel like we have equal rights in America, right under the surface, there are huge issues that are applied that really do affect women. And it's time for all the women in America and all the men that love women, and all the gay people, and all the people of color that we've all fought for to fight for us now."</p>
<p>If a rich, white, Academy Award winning actress is expecting sympathy from the minority groups she names, I expect she’ll have rather a long wait.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Watch Julie Borowski Expose the Myth of the Wage Gap</div></div></div>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 20:21:32 +0000logan.albright61154 at http://www.freedomworks.orgEmpowerment, Not Entitlement: FreedomWorks Launches a Series of Minority Engagement Townhalls in NC http://www.freedomworks.org/content/empowerment-not-entitlement-freedomworks-launches-series-minority-engagement-townhalls-nc
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/CL.jpg?itok=gCza-yba"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/CL.jpg?itok=gCza-yba" width="384" height="480" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p><strong>WHAT:</strong> FreedomWorks’ Empower Project is launching a series of townhall events in North Carolina featuring FreedomWorks fellow, Rev. CL Bryant. The townhalls are an opportunity to have a frank discussion about topics, including: entrepreneurship, criminal justice reform, school choice, financial literacy, and growing the economy in urban communities. Each event will begin with comments from Rev. CL Bryant, followed by Q&amp;A from those in attendance.</p>
<p><strong>WHEN:</strong> The event series will take place throughout February on the dates listed below. The program is expected to expand the series into additional events in other states throughout March.</p>
<p><strong>Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 6:30pm ET:</strong> Empower Townhall in West Ahoskie, NC</p>
<p><strong>Friday, February 27, 2015 at 12:30pm ET:</strong> Rev. CL Bryant working lunch with minority farmers and landowners in Ahoskie, NC</p>
<p><strong>Saturday, February 28, 2015 at 10:00am ET:</strong> Empower Townhall in Roper, NC</p>
<p><strong>WHERE:</strong> The events will be taking place in locations across North Carolina. Press looking for the exact event locations should RSVP to Jackie Bodnar at <a href="mailto:jbodnar@freedomworks.org">jbodnar@freedomworks.org</a>.</p>
<p><strong>WHY:</strong> Liberal economic policies disproportionately harm the black community. According to the <a href="http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t02.htm">Bureau of Labor Statistics</a>, general unemployment is currently 5.7 percent, while black unemployment is 10.3 percent- almost double the national average. The black teen unemployment rate stands at 29.7 percent. Energy and food price increases fall hardest on minority households across the nation.</p>
<p>FreedomWorks’ ongoing Empower project is a citizen engagement program to educate individuals of all races, colors and creeds on issues of economic empowerment, and the many benefits that free enterprise can have on families and communities across America. For more information, please visit <a href="http://www.Empower.org">www.Empower.org</a> or contact Jackie Bodnar at <a href="mailto:JBodnar@FreedomWorks.org">JBodnar@FreedomWorks.org</a>.</p>
</div></div></div>Mon, 23 Feb 2015 14:00:02 +0000jbodnar61153 at http://www.freedomworks.orgFirst Amendment Rights: License Requiredhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/first-amendment-rights-license-required
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/French_Quarter03_New_Orleans.JPG?itok=j62GJrqz"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/French_Quarter03_New_Orleans.JPG?itok=j62GJrqz" width="480" height="360" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Should one need to obtain a license to speak on public sidewalks about the history and architecture of an area? Or does the First Amendment protect our free speech rights from prior restraints, such as licensing requirements? According to <a href="https://casetext.com/case/kagan-v-city-of-new-orleans">a short opinion</a> in <em>Kagan v. City of New Orleans</em>, which lacked any in depth legal reasoning, the Fifth Circuit ruled a license can be required to give guided tours of New Orleans for pay.</p>
<p>There is now a split amongst the circuit courts on this matter, after the <a href="http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/E585CD5E522FBE9585257D04004F7891/$file/13-7063-1499657.pdf">DC Circuit ruled last year</a> that such licensing requirements violate our First Amendment right to free speech. In light of the DC Circuit’s ruling, the plaintiffs in <em>Kagan</em> have appealed the Fifth Circuit’s decision to the Supreme Court, which is scheduled to decide this Friday whether to hear oral arguments.</p>
<p>While the case involves licensing requirements for tour guides exclusively, if the Supreme Court takes on the case and depending on how the court rules, the implications could be much broader. <a href="http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/01/29/Silly-Way-We-License-Jobs-Costs-Us-All-203-Billion-Year">Nearly a third of all jobs</a> in the United States now require an occupational license, a six-fold increase in the past two generations. Because of the potential broader implications of the case, the International Association for Health Coaches actually wrote an <a href="http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/International-Assoc.-for-Health-Coaches-amicus-brief-IJ066512xA6322.pdf">amicus curiae brief</a> in the hopes that licensing requirements in their field could be curbed as well. As health coaches, they fear that their speech to clients could be squashed because of the increase in licensing requirements across the country.</p>
<p>In their brief, the city of New Orleans claims the licensing requirement is not really a restriction on speech. They claim that since an individual can speak freely once the individual acquires the license, there is no restriction on speech. However, this prior restraint on speech is the worst kind of speech restriction because it prevents any speech from taking place until a prior approval is given. While the city claims this prior restraint is necessary to protect visitors from “criminals, drug addicts and swindlers,” in a world of Yelp and other review services, there is no reason the government needs to “protect” us from bad tour guides.</p>
<p>In fact, most occupational licensing requirements are now obsolete because of reviewing services such as Yelp, which can provide consumers the information necessary to find the appropriate service providers. Today, most occupational licensing requirements are in place for economic protectionism, protecting established businesses from competition by startups. Occupational licensing requirements create barriers to entry, which limit competition and help to prevent individuals from bettering themselves by creating businesses of their own.</p>
<p>Hopefully the Supreme Court grants the appeal and fixes the split in the circuit courts by ruling for freedom and economic opportunity, rather than free speech restrictions and economic protectionism.</p>
<p><strong>Update: On Monday, February 23, the Supreme Court denied Kagan's cert petition, meaning the Supreme Court will not hear oral arguments in the case. This is a victory for occupational licensing requirements, and a loss for Freedom of Speech and free markets.</strong></p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">More on Occupational Licensing Requirements</div></div></div>Fri, 20 Feb 2015 21:05:09 +0000mgreibrok61152 at http://www.freedomworks.orgEmpower Member Babette Holder on Black History: Abolitionist & Author Frances Ellen Watkins Harperhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/empower-member-babette-holder-black-history-abolitionist-author-frances-ellen-watkins-harper
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/frances e w harper.jpeg?itok=l_o1hiLs"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/frances e w harper.jpeg?itok=l_o1hiLs" width="136" height="168" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Frances Ellen Watkins Harper was born in Baltimore, Maryland, to free parents and at the age of three, she became an orphan upon the death of her mother. Her aunt and uncle on her maternal side of the family adopted her and raised her until the age of thirteen.</p>
<p>Harper’s uncle, Rev. William Watkins, was a civil rights leader, minister and teacher at the Academy for Negro Youth, which is where Frances was enrolled as a student. Some state that Rev. Watkins was a major influence on Frances’ life and the reason she too became an abolitionist and civil rights advocate. Rev. Watkins was an abolitionist who helped slaves escape through the underground railroad to Canada.</p>
<p>By the age of fourteen and needing employment, Frances could only acquire work as a seamstress or other domestic service employment. While still residing in Baltimore, she published her volume of poetry in 1845 titled, <em>Forest Leaves</em>, (sadly there are no known copies today) and her second book was published at the age of 20 titled, <em>Poems on Miscellaneous Subjects</em>, a very popular and successful book. Frances also had novels featured in a series in a christian magazine from 1868 to 1888.</p>
<p>Ms. Watkins moved to Ohio in 1858 and garnered employment as the first female teacher at Union Seminary, which was established by the Ohio Conference of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. In 1854 after joining the American Anti-Slavery Society, Frances delivered her first speech as a traveling lecturer for the organization titled: “Education and the Elevation of Colored Race.” That specific anti-slavery speech was such a success that for two years she traveled throughout Maine speaking and then continued to travel and speak throughout the East and Midwest from 1856 to 1860.</p>
<p>Frances Ellen Watkins became Frances Ellen Watkins Harper in 1860 when she wed Fenton Harper, a widower with three children. Mr. and Mrs. Harper had one daughter together named Mary Frances and after the death of her husband in 1863, Frances she took the children with her as she returned to the lecture circuit. In 1866, Mrs. Harper gave a speech at the Eleventh National Women’s Rights Convention in New York City, where she spoke about the inequality in women’s rights, as well as racial wrongs. A brief excerpt of the speech titled, "We Are All Bound Up Together," is as follows:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We are all bound up together in one great bundle of humanity, and society cannot trample on the weakest and feeblest of its members without receiving the curse in its own soul. You tried that in the case of the Negro. You pressed him down for two centuries; and in so doing you crippled the moral strength and paralyzed the spiritual energies of the white men of the country. When the hands of the black were fettered, white men were deprived of the liberty of speech and the freedom of the press. Society cannot afford to neglect the enlightenment of any class of its members. (Read more <a href="http://www.blackpast.org/1866-frances-ellen-watkins-harper-we-are-all-bound-together-0">here</a>)</p>
</blockquote>
<p>For a time, Mrs. Harper lived in a home that was a station on the underground railway, and she also supported her uncle’s abolitionist endeavors with donations of money, clothing and any other material needs. Mrs. Harper often listened to the stories of the escapees and comforted them as best she could during their brief stay in her home. During one point of her advocacy with the suffrage movement, she had a falling out with members when she remarked that black men should have priority in getting the right to vote. Being a women’s rights advocate did not mean that Mrs. Harper was not an advocate for the rights of men too. Being a woman of color, Mrs. Harper saw that the women’s suffrage movement was an arena that needed more diversity, especially during the Reconstruction Era.</p>
<p>In 1875, Mrs. Harper delivered a speech in Philadelphia at the Centennial Anniversary of the nation’s oldest abolitionist society, the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting the Abolition of Slavery. In this speech, she outlined the work that she envisioned needed to be done on behalf of blacks and freedom. Here is a brief excerpt of her speech which was bold for this era:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ladies and Gentlemen: The great problem to be solved by the American people, if I understand it, is this: Whether or not there is strength enough in democracy, virtue enough in our civilization, and power enough in our religion to have mercy and deal justly with four millions of people but lately translated from the old oligarchy of slavery to the new commonwealth of freedom; and upon the right solution of this question depends in a large measure the future strength, progress and durability of our nation. The most important question before us colored people is not simply what the Democratic party may do against us or the Republican party do for us; but what are we going to do for ourselves? What shall we do toward developing our character, adding our quota to the civilization and strength of the country, diversifying our industry, and practicing those lordly virtues that conquer success and turn the world’s dread laugh into admiring recognition? – Read more of this powerful speech <a href="http://www.blackpast.org/1875-frances-ellen-watkins-harper-great-problem-be-solved">here</a>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Mrs. Harper was also one of the founders of the National Association of Colored Women’s Club with Harriet Tubman and other notable civil rights activist women in Washington, D.C. Mrs. Harper continued to lecture and write until her death from heart disease in 1911.</p>
<p>One of Mrs. Harper's most noted works was the fiction novel titled, <em>Iola Leroy, or Shadows Uplifted</em>, published in 1892 and is noted for being one of the first novels published by a black American woman in the United States. Her writings were published in Frederick Douglass’ anti-slavery paper the <em>North Star</em> and numerous other publications. Mrs. Harper’s writings were sadly forgotten and neglected until they were rediscovered during the late 20th century.</p>
<hr /><p>Follow Babette on Twitter @Bhold226
Visit the website <a href="http://thelastcivilright.org/">TheLastCivilRight.org</a></p>
<p>The FreedomWorks Outreach Program, Empower.org, aims to educate individuals of all races, colors and creeds on issues of economic empowerment and the many benefits that free enterprise can have on families and communities across America.</p>
<p>To learn more please visit <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/campaign/empower">here</a>.</p>
</div></div></div>Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:17:28 +0000deneen.borelli61151 at http://www.freedomworks.orgObamaCare will make filing a tax return an even more frustrating, complex processhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/obamacare-will-make-filing-tax-return-even-more-frustrating-complex-process
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Screen Shot 2015-02-20 at 10.11.30 AM.png?itok=wsKEaDCn"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/Screen Shot 2015-02-20 at 10.11.30 AM.png?itok=wsKEaDCn" width="480" height="212" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Americans already <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/claims-about-the-cost-and-time-it-takes-to-file-taxes/2013/04/13/858a97fc-a455-11e2-9c03-6952ff305f35_blog.html">spend some 6 billion hours and $168 billion each year</a> complying with a complex and onerous tax code. But ObamaCare is going to make tax filing even more of a chore for consumers who received subsidies for health plans purchased through the state and federal exchanges.</p>
<p>Tax filing season <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/many-obamacare-enrollees-are-finding-out-they-owe-irs-lot-money">will be extraordinarily difficult</a> for many who received subsidies for which they weren't eligible. But just filing a tax return may be a headache, adding to the already complicated process that Americans have come to loathe. <em>Reason</em>'s J.D. Tuccille <a href="http://reason.com/blog/2015/02/19/obamacare-inflicts-irs-paperwork-on-new">points to</a> a <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/insured-through-obamacare-prepare-for-a-tax-headache/">CBS Money Watch report</a> that describes the new two-page IRS <a href="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8962.pdf">Form 8962</a>, which anyone who has received subsidies will be required to fill out and submit with their tax return.</p>
<p>"To put the correct figures in several of these spaces, you'll need to complete charts and worksheets found elsewhere in the 20-page instruction booklet. If you are, say, divorced and sharing expenses with your ex-spouse, you'll also need to fill out the second page of [Form 8962]. Though this page has just seven lines, there are 37 spaces," <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/insured-through-obamacare-prepare-for-a-tax-headache/">CBS Money Watch explains</a>. "Worse yet, according to the IRS, completing that page requires cooperating and sharing both insurance and tax information with your ex-spouse -- not exactly a walk in the park for those with acrimonious splits."</p>
<p>Not only will it put some filers into extraordinarily awkward spots, the report notes that there is no time estimate for how long it will take for ObamaCare subsidy recipients to fill out the form, but as CBS Money Watch notes, "[e]xperts estimate that someone with a complex situation will spend more time on the 8962 than they will filling out all of their other tax forms combined."</p>
<p>Calling this "a complex situation" doesn't begin to do it justice. <em>The New York Times</em> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/21/us/incorrect-tax-information-health-insurance.html">reports</a> that some 800,000 consumers enrolled in health plans through the ObamaCare exchanges "received erroneous tax information from the government." Form 8962 requires monthly calculations of subsidies received, as well as an annual total. "Consumers can expect to receive corrected data in the first week of March," the <em>Times</em> noted. "With the new data, officials warned, some taxpayers will owe more and some will owe less."</p>
<p>Much has already been written about what ObamaCare is in terms of handouts for crony big businesses, <a href="http://theweek.com/articles/539562/irony-obamacare-liberals-came-love-big-business">including health insurance companies</a>. It would seem that one could add tax preparation services to those that may reap some big gains at filers' expense.</p>
</div></div></div>Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:17:22 +0000jpye61150 at http://www.freedomworks.orgLess Imprisonment Doesn't Lead to More Crimehttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/less-imprisonment-doesnt-lead-more-crime
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/empty cells.jpg?itok=mCmh5C9r"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/empty cells.jpg?itok=mCmh5C9r" width="480" height="316" alt="It turns out that fewer prisoners doesn&#039;t mean more criminals." /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>The United States has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world, as well as the largest prison population anywhere on Earth. With all those people locked away, one would hope that the streets would be pretty safe for the rest of us. Yet in many parts of the country, crime rates remain high, leading some to question whether putting so many people in prison is actually making us any safer.</p>
<p>Overcriminalization of non-violent crimes is clogging up the system, making it harder for law enforcement and judicial authorities to appropriately deal with criminals who are truly dangerous. Still, the suggestion that we should strive for lower incarceration rates worries some people. Won’t letting people out of prison just result in more criminals on the streets?</p>
<p>While this concern is understandable and intuitive, an analysis of incarceration and crime statistics across the states does not support it. A recent study from <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/multimedia/data-visualizations/2014/imprisonment-and-crime">Pew Charitable Trusts</a> found that, contrary to expectations, many states that have worked to reduce their incarceration rates have seen an accompanying decrease in crime.</p>
<p>It is important not to overstate this relationship. News outlets, in search of catchy headlines, are often all too quick to draw sensational conclusions from relatively nuanced studies. A dedication to objectivity, fairness, and truth demands that we resist these temptations towards exaggeration.</p>
<p>The conclusion to be drawn from the numbers is not that less incarceration leads to less crime - the data does not support that claim. Neither can we claim that there is a causal relationship between incarceration and crime rates. The causes of crime are extremely complex and cannot be captured in a single variable.</p>
<p>But the important takeaway from this study is that there appears to be no systematic relationship between crime and incarceration. This means that fears that sentencing and prison reform will lead to more crime are unfounded. It also means that we cannot expect to reduce crime in any meaningful way simply by indiscriminately throwing more people in prison.</p>
<p>A final takeaway from the data is that nearly every state, regardless of its incarceration rates, saw net reductions in crime between 2008 and 2013. This revelation should serve as a sobering dose of optimism for those who feel that things have never been worse.</p>
<p>The justice system punishes too many people unjustly, and violates too many of our constitutional rights. This study should help ease some concerns about the reforms that are badly needed to make America a safer, freer place to live.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Learn More about the need for Criminal Justice Reform</div></div></div>Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:23:01 +0000logan.albright61148 at http://www.freedomworks.org18 Must-Know Facts about U.S. Prisonshttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/18-must-know-facts-about-us-prisons
<div class="field field-name-field-image field-type-image field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" rel="og:image rdfs:seeAlso" resource="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/prison.jpg?itok=8Y9OM1Tn"><img typeof="foaf:Image" src="//d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/styles/large/s3/field/image/prison.jpg?itok=8Y9OM1Tn" width="480" height="260" alt="" /></div></div></div><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><ol><li><p>Over <a href="http://www.sentencingproject.org/template/page.cfm?id=107">2.2 million</a> people are currently in U.S. jails or prisons.</p></li>
<li><p>That’s more than the <a href="http://www.wired.com/2015/01/josh-begley-prison-map/">entire population</a> of New Mexico.</p></li>
<li><p>It's the <a href="http://anewworldsociety.ning.com/profiles/blogs/with-the-release-of-orange-is-the-new-black-the-real-truth-about-">highest prison</a> population in the entire world.*</p></li>
<li><p>The U.S. also has the highest prison rate in the world at about <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/06/prisons/html/nn2page1.stm">724 people</a> per 100,000.*</p></li>
<li><p>Half of the world’s prison population of approximately nine million people are <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/uk/06/prisons/html/nn2page1.stm">held</a> in the U.S., Russia, or China.</p></li>
<li><p>Over <a href="http://famm.org/the-facts-with-sources/#1">2.7 million</a> children in the U.S. have a parent behind bars.</p></li>
<li><p>There are over <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/06/the-u-s-has-more-jails-than-colleges-heres-a-map-of-where-those-prisoners-live/">5,000</a> jails and prisons in the U.S.</p></li>
<li><p>There are <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/06/the-u-s-has-more-jails-than-colleges-heres-a-map-of-where-those-prisoners-live/">more jails</a> than colleges in the U.S.</p></li>
<li><p>In many parts of the country, there are <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/06/the-u-s-has-more-jails-than-colleges-heres-a-map-of-where-those-prisoners-live/">more people</a> in jail than living on college campuses.</p></li>
<li><p>The U.S. prison population has more than <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/13/wonkbook-11-facts-about-americas-prison-population">quadrupled</a> since the early 1980s: when mandatory minimum sentencing laws for drugs when into effect.</p></li>
<li><p>Severe prison overcrowding means that violent criminals are <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2013/aug/31/local/la-me-jail-early-release-20130901">being</a> <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2383946/Nearly-10-000-California-prisoners-released-early-ease-severe-overcrowding.html">released</a> <a href="http://www.9news.com/story/news/local/2014/03/03/prisoners-released-due-to-overcrowding/1922852/">early</a> to make room for non-violent drug offenders that are required to serve a minimum amount of time--regardless of what a judge says.</p></li>
<li><p>About <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/06/10/reduced-sentences-drug-offenders/10272889/">half</a> of the inmates in federal prisons are serving time for <em>non-violent</em> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/02/1386251/almost-half-of-federal-prisoners-held-for-drug-crimes/">drug</a> offenses.</p></li>
<li><p>Federal law currently <em>requires</em> a mandatory minimum sentence of <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-members-congress-support-smarter-sentencing-act">five years</a> for a first time, non-violent drug offense.</p></li>
<li><p>Approximately <a href="http://www.ussc.gov/research-and-publications/annual-reports-sourcebooks/2012/sourcebook-2012">60 percent</a> of federal drug offenders are subject to mandatory minimum sentences.</p></li>
<li><p>The average <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/13/wonkbook-11-facts-about-americas-prison-population">annual cost</a> to incarcerate one inmate in federal prison is <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/03/18/2013-06139/annual-determination-of-average-cost-of-incarceration">about</a> $29,000.</p></li>
<li><p>Incarceration costs taxpayers almost <a href="http://www.wired.com/2015/01/josh-begley-prison-map/">$70 billion</a> annually.</p></li>
<li><p>State spending on corrections has grown about <a href="http://famm.org/the-facts-with-sources/#1">300 percent</a> in just the past 20 years.</p></li>
<li><p>The <a href="http://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-members-congress-support-smarter-sentencing-act">Smarter Sentencing Act</a> would save taxpayers nearly $24 billion over the next 20 years</p></li>
</ol><p>*Disclaimer: Excludes countries that cannot be verified (e.g., North Korea).</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Click Here to Learn More About the Smarter Sentencing Act!</div></div></div>Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:54:11 +0000JBorowski61146 at http://www.freedomworks.orgFreedomWorks Joins Nation’s Largest Transpartisan Coalition for Criminal Justice Reformhttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/freedomworks-joins-nation%E2%80%99s-largest-transpartisan-coalition-criminal-justice-reform
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>An unlikely alliance of progressive and conservative groups has formed to pursue an aggressive effort to reform America’s criminal justice system. The <a href="http://www.coalitionforpublicsafety.org/">Coalition for Public Safety</a> will be the largest national effort working to pursue comprehensive criminal justice reforms that will reduce jail and prison populations and associated costs, and end the systemic problems of over-criminalization and over-incarceration.</p>
<p>The Coalition’s partners include the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Americans for Tax Reform, the Center for American Progress, the Faith &amp; Freedom Coalition, FreedomWorks, the Leadership Conference Education Fund, and Right on Crime.</p>
<p>FreedomWorks President Matt Kibbe commented:</p>
<p>“FreedomWorks is honored to be a part of this unique transpartisan coalition. For decades, politicians have appeared to be 'tough on crime' by passing onerous laws that trap people in a horribly broken criminal justice system. We look forward to promoting meaningful and responsible criminal justice reforms that will bring families back together, restore our civil liberties, and reduce the number of nonviolent offenders in our prison system."</p>
<p>“Comprehensive criminal justice reform is not a uniquely Democrat or Republican idea. The ideas of equal treatment under the law, innocent until proven guilty, redemption for those who have made non-violent mistakes and want to earn a second chance, are all American values.”</p>
<p>“We have a fiscal and a moral obligation to fix our broken criminal justice system. This is the land of the free, yet the US has the highest incarceration rate in the world. We can do better.”</p>
<p>FreedomWorks will be participating in a series of educational events to inform the public on the need for criminal justice reform, and work with Coalition partners to connect activists on the left and right who haven’t historically worked together in the past.</p>
<p>FreedomWorks has also set up a resource for citizens to tell their stories of criminal justice abuse at <a href="http://www.FreedomWorks.org/JusticeForAll">www.FreedomWorks.org/JusticeForAll</a>.</p>
<p>FreedomWorks aims to educate, build, and mobilize the largest network of activists advocating the principles of smaller government, lower taxes, free markets, personal liberty and the rule of law. For more information, please visit <a href="http://www.FreedomWorks.org">www.FreedomWorks.org</a> or contact Jackie Bodnar at <a href="mailto:JBodnar@FreedomWorks.org">JBodnar@FreedomWorks.org</a>.</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-button-text field-type-text field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">Tell us your story about criminal justice abuse</div></div></div>Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:07:58 +0000jbodnar61145 at http://www.freedomworks.orgTell Your Representative: Support the Responsibility in Federal Contracting Acthttp://www.freedomworks.org/content/tell-your-representative-support-responsibility-federal-contracting-act
<div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>As one of our more than 6.9 million FreedomWorks members nationwide, I urge you to contact your representative today and ask him or her to support the Responsibility in Federal Contracting Act (RIFCA), H.R. 924. Introduced by Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), the bill would save taxpayers billions of dollars by changing the way that the “prevailing wage” is calculated under the Davis-Bacon Act.</p>
<p>Currently, under the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, the wages paid to workers on federally funded construction contracts are based on the local “prevailing wage”, a statistic which is easily manipulated by unions, who effectively set the prevailing wage in many areas of the country. This makes it very difficult for non-union labor to compete for federal contracts, and also increases project costs to the taxpayers by over a billion dollars each year.</p>
<p>Aside from wasting taxpayer money, the Davis-Bacon requirements also create a barrier to small firms and non-union labor that may want to compete for these contracts. Both the wage requirements and the paperwork burden of complying with Davis-Bacon effectively shut out competition with the large union shops – which, of course, was the point of the law.</p>
<p>The Responsibility in Federal Contracting Act lessens the Davis-Bacon Act’s negative impacts by calculating the prevailing wage using statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This would make it much more difficult to manipulate the wage requirements and would thus increase competition for federal construction projects – saving taxpayers billions of dollars in the process.</p>
<p>This bill is a much-needed reform to an obsolete Great Depression-era law. I hope you’ll call your representative and ask him or her to support the Responsibility in Federal Contracting Act, H.R. 924, and to co-sponsor the bill if they have not already done so.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Matt Kibbe<br />
President and CEO,
FreedomWorks</p>
</div></div></div><div class="field field-name-files field-type-file field-label-above"><div class="field-label">Files:&nbsp;</div><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="file"><img class="file-icon" alt="" title="application/pdf" src="/modules/file/icons/application-pdf.png" /> <a href="///d7.freedomworks.org.s3.amazonaws.com/LoS%202015-02-17%20-%20Support%20-%20Responsibility%20in%20Federal%20Contracting%20Act.pdf" type="application/pdf; length=466914">LoS 2015-02-17 - Support - Responsibility in Federal Contracting Act.pdf</a></span></div></div></div>Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:16:06 +0000mkibbe61142 at http://www.freedomworks.org